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.
we know that if you have chronic vascular disease that can that can sort of atrophy in the brain just because you're not you can't respond to cognitive challenge because you can't there's a thing called neurovascular coupling which is where the neurons are more active so they ask for more blood supply but if you can't Supply that because you have you know a vascular disease right then then that's a problem
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.