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.
if this fifteen-year-old has a seizure disorder and there are constituents in this meta in this plant that can help with that that makes sense to use if this fifteen-year-old has attention-deficit or anxiety or depression and other medicines are not working or maybe the risks of those other medicines are a lot greater I think these are reasonable tools in our medical toolbox that can be used
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.