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.
one of those three individuals chews an excessive amount of Nicorette. Used to be a smoker and I asked him why and he said because, in his estimation, it's protective against Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, or at least the nicotinic acetylcholine augmentation of nicotine, 'cause nicotine is an acetylcholine receptor obviously, is known to create a state of focus and neural enhancement.
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.
the Nobel prize winning neuroscientist at Columbia University whose name I won't tell you or maybe I will who when I went to visit his office chewed no fewer than five pieces of Nicorette in the course of a half an hour and I'm like what's going on he got a Nobel Prize but this looks kind of pathologic and I said why and he said well the nicotine is to offset age related loss of dopaminergic and coleric neurons I thought really he's like yeah when I quit smoking because I want lung cancer but this is him this is anic data I'm not sugesting you do this