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 top layers of the epidermis are damaged, those stem cells can become activated. And you also have the stem cells that give rise to hair follicles. What happens is the top layers of the skin are basically burned off by a very low level of burn andor the cells in the deeper layer start to churn out new cells which go and rescue the lesion essentially clear out the lesion and replace that lesion with healthy skin cells.
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.