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.
it's all going to be entirely dependent on the machine so you actually have to customize those parameters for every single machine and so that actually kind of takes a while to actually kind of go and calibrate and kind of get used to what your eyes used to seeing and it's also going to be dependent on the signal the overall magnetic field as was overall signal-to-noise for that coil set that you're using so each one has to be effectively tuned
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.