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.
unfortunately every time I have a brilliant idea just based on first principles I still have to go and check if it's grounded in the foundation of science and time's it is but many times it is not I come up with an idea and I'm like this has got to be right but rule oh they're physiologically impossible and there's even an experiment that one day suggested this or it's you know I made an assumption but I can clearly see that it was not the case
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.