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.
I found the phone to be far worse than a laptop for for example and it seems like the laptop tops are using much higher rates and frequencies which typically uh I think the the worst spot to be is like in this 120 to uh 500 Hertz range
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.
I think the more time you can spend looking at a laptop versus your phone is better
I think the dangerous window is the phones which are in like the hundreds of Hertz range and that's anecdotally I can look at my MacBook way longer than I can look at my phone and I think it's a combination of the size and the flicker