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.
especially I think when you take about when you talk about kids who have lots of athletic potential and they're 11 years old and you know maybe there is a decision to be made are you gonna be a pitcher are you going to be a tennis player are you going to be a basketball player you're going to play lacrosse you're going to swim if you knew you'd have a longer shelf life in one over the other would that at least weigh into the decision-making process
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.