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.
So I tell patients like for example if we treat their rosacea and they get improvement after two or three sessions they should come every year and repeat it even if their rosacea is quiet because it really does help with anti-aging.
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.
So I tell patients like for example if we treat their rosacea and they get improvement after two or three sessions they should come every year and repeat it even if their rosacea is quiet because it really does help with anti-aging.