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 would argue that it's not a straight line of risk but it probably goes I think from zero to one there's probably no measurable harm for most people one per day or one per week probably one per day up to one per day it's probably very difficult to discern the harm but I'm going to put a caveat on that and then I think the risk starts to climb pretty steeply after that and I think it climbs nonlinearly after that
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.