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, over the years, learned a lot about the mechanisms that shuttle the RNAs between generations. We know about genes that are needed just for that, about worms, that would be perfectly okay, but just don't have the capacity to transfer the RNAs to the next generations. We know about genes that will make the responses longer or shorter. We know about genes that prevent the transfer of RNA between different tissues, about genes that make certain small RNAs.
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.