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.
we should probably have a sense of where we are on the igf-1 curve and be checking that metric frequently you know there's a saying that if you can't measure something you can't improve it and having feedback on where numerous different levels are whether it's blood sugar levels or igf-1 levels etc is going to be really important in the future for people to micromanage if you will this switch that we talked about in in my book
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.