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.
catawba study okay the catawba study cardiovascular risk factors in a melanesian population apparently free from stroke and ischemic heart disease the catawba study you can look at the study again and you can look at the later in the study when they talk about what they eat they eat a large amount of carbohydrates carbohydrate intake is high total fat intake is low
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.