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.
And I think that this probably intersects with sanitation in our environment, and the fact that we don't have access to new microbes that might help us degrade the fiber. That we actually have lost these microbes, and they're in some ways irrecoverable without deliberate reintroduction of fiber-degrading microbes.
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.
So it could be that over time this becomes a one-way street and it's hard for us to recover um the the microbes that that actually can degrade the fiber.