We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
we essentially we lumped together two fairly distinct diseases or disease processes and call them all Alzheimer's disease and that has made figuring out the approach to the more common late onset or sporadic Alzheimer's disease you know Finding treatments for that I think has been hindered because we've kind of lumped it in with this other disease
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
over 90% of the research is focus on the group and they their reasoning is because it's the same disease which is a false premise