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.
What we've basically found is that creams don't move the needle on data like if you're trying to really address the crow's feet or you're trying to reduce the UV damage which you can't see with your eye it's on a machine using multi-spectral Imaging uh you really need to use the devices like lasers and other things IPL which I will show you in a minute
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.