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.
out of 10 pediatric SARS to infection cases eight children persistently tested positive on rectal swabs even after nasopharyngeal testing was negative raising the possibility of fecal oral transmission however we do not have evidence of replication competent virus in fecal swabs which is required to confirm the potential for fecal to oral transmission
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.