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 don't think anybody disputes that the bats weren't transmitting it to people in the fall or winter i think everybody agrees that by the time september october november rolled around the bats themselves would have been in hibernation so the probability that a bat directly transmitted it to a human in say november december exceedingly low
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.
i don't think anybody disputes that the bats weren't transmitting it to people in the fall or winter i think everybody agrees that by the time september october november rolled around the bats themselves would have been in hibernation so the probability that a bat directly transmitted it to a human in say november december exceedingly low