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.
if the eyes aren't aign you know our eye muscles and the Brain behind them are really responsible for keeping the two eyes looking straight ahead and if that's not working properly and one eye is is off-kilter and therefore the image of what we're looking at is falling on different spots of the retina it's not sinking upright in the brain that can lead to this disease condition called amop where that eye is no longer talking to the brain properly
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.
if one eye doesn't see that well like maybe you're very nearsighted or farsighted in one eye and pretty normal sided in the other or the two refractive errors are quite different from each other other um that can lead to a condition you've talked about on the podcast before called amblyopia uh which is probably one of the more common or most common eye diseases of children or uh if the eyes aren't aign
Once you get out past a certain age, there are components of the brain that can become permanently blind to it, which doesn't mean they're going to lose more vision. It just means that they're probably only seeing correctly through one eye.