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.
I wonder I mean do you think it's possible that that we are conflating research with processed sugar and high fructose corn syrup with with fruit and saying that fruit or fruit juice is bad for humans based on Research done with processed sugars which don't really behave the same way in the human body or do you think I'm off base with that that premise
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.