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.
this is not to be confused with with the idea that this is a sugar feeding tumor idea this is not a sugar feeding tumor paradigm because to be clear on a ketogenic diet your glucose levels might go down from normal but it's not an enormous reduction even in a complete fast you'll still maintain at least three millimolar of glucose it's the insulin that becomes virtually unmeasurable that's right so it's and this is an insulin feeding the tumor question
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.