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.
And Peter, I hear this all the time where people say, you know, I don't trust scientific research because one study says this and one study says that and they all contradict each other. And what I say to people is I say, did you actually read the study or are you just looking at the social media hot takes? Because my guess is you're probably looking at the hot takes.
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.