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.
Uh there were some seinal studies by Rooric and PESA in the '9s and 2000s that kind of delineated a lot of what Susan's talking about where they looked at uh CT scans of similar the same individual over time. I think some of those studies had a 15 to 20 year span and there was quantitative calculations of bone density and bone projection of the mandible, the maxilla, the frontal bone.
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.