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.
But I think as we've stepped back and scientists have started to figure out and look at some of the data, we're now more intuitive about, well, actually that might not be the best or the most optimal approach.
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.
But I think as we've stepped back and scientists have started to say have started to figure out and look at some of the data, you know, we're now more intuitive about well actually that might not be the best or the most optimal approach.
the science on the ice bath has changed quite a bit like we would go from these workouts in Long Run straight to a creek straight into cold water whereas you know the science is now showing you want your body to respond to the inflammation first so that's more what we do now where we wouldn't do an ice bath
the science on the ice bath has changed quite a bit like we would go from these workouts in long run straight to the creek straight into cold water whereas you know the science is now showing you want your body to respond to the inflammation first
whereas you know the science is now showing you want your body to respond to the inflammation first so that's more what we do now where we wouldn't do an ice bath