Curiously, it doesn't say what the risk reduction is. It's probably one of those nearly negligible, yet statistically significant and therefore reportable numbers...
Or it's just another case of scientifically illiterate "journalism" overstating claims they misunderstood without actually reading the paper.
Whatever the case, there may be a select lucky very few that may reap the benefits of reduced risk. The rest of us? We gonna die.
Also take note that 21 is also the number of days that a woman on average is not on her period every month... that leads me to believe it's absolute total bullshit.
Oh yea then I'm not getting any cancer.
Or it's just another case of scientifically illiterate "journalism" overstating claims they misunderstood without actually reading the paper.
Whatever the case, there may be a select lucky very few that may reap the benefits of reduced risk. The rest of us? We gonna die.
Also take note that 21 is also the number of days that a woman on average is not on her period every month... that leads me to believe it's absolute total bullshit.