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.
the immune system is really not liking that and that's really the equivalent of having asbestosis having little crystals of oxalate collecting and forming in tissues all over the body like the raphides
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.
and then forming these particulate Nano crystals which are Uber toxic I mean we talk about nanoparticles in their toxicity well any kind of Crystal like asbestos fibers and so on are really quite annoying to the immune system
I mean we talk about nanoparticles in their toxicity well any kind of Crystal like asbestos fibers and so on are really quite annoying to the immune system and the immune system tries to do stuff to protect you and hide them and if they can get rid of them they will but they certainly can't when you're eating them every meal