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.
yes people will say part of it is because the definitions change there's more awareness there's more resources there's more clinicians making diagnosis um but people in the field uh believe that um those changes don't explain the drastic changes in the numbers um and there has to be something else involved
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.
it begs the question what is it that is driving the increase in the prevalence of ASD not withstanding that there has also been a larger uh bucket included in a larger net cast around it