The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
well amyloid is necessary for alzheimer's disease it's not necessary for dementia but you know if you look at the definition pathologically of what alzheimer's is it is the plaques the out the amyloid plaques and the tau tangles in the brain so you know that was what's required pathologically to make a diagnosis of alzheimer's disease but that diagnosis will only be made post-mortem technically technically yeah
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.