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.
When I eat fruit as I've seen on my continuous glucose monitor my blood sugar goes up maybe 130 140 it comes back down quickly there's a very low area under the curve i don't get reactive hypoglycemia i don't drink coffee i have not had coffee in probably 20 plus years of my life i don't like it i never will i have no sources of methyl xanthines in my diet i don't like chocolate i don't think it's good for humans it's burnt seeds coffee is burnt seed water
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.
Post-meal glucose spikes in non-diabetics drive long-term cardiometabolic disease independently of HbA1c.
Wearing a continuous glucose monitor leads to personalized dietary improvements that hold up beyond 12 weeks.
Continuous glucose monitors meaningfully change behavior in non-diabetic adults beyond the first month.
CGM use in metabolically healthy adults induces orthorexic-style dietary anxiety without health benefit.