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 did a study on patients and found that they were drinking large amounts of soft drinks that they had high uric acid levels and we even looked at liver biopsies and found an increased expression of fructokinase
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.
in the case of what we historically called Naf D um we really want to eliminate liquid sources of fructose right so if we're trying to get patients to change their diet Yeah by all means you know keep eating your berries and your fruit um but get rid of the smoothies get rid of any sugar sweetened beverages not just because of their caloric content but because of that huge bolus of fructose um that is hitting the gut and then as you described heading through the portal circulation to the liver