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.
now it was like the 1930s um so no long-term safety studies or efficacy studies and it was put in as an experiment in gr rapis Michigan in the mid-40s after about a decade or so they noticed that carries rates cavity rates were going down and so based on this observation it just went like wildfire throughout the United States
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.