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 there I can give you an example I used to have moderate allergies now they're pretty mild but because allergies can fluctuate a bit and they would come every spring and I just assumed it was pollen But what is pollen in the end? But I assumed it was pine. But uh when we did the correlation, well, turns out it correlates better with eucalyptus.
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.