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.
in the old days you know like ancient in in the ancient world if you had cataracts the way they dealt with it is that they would just poke the lens of the eye backward and it would drop down into the bottom of the eye so that you now had a clear optical pathway again to let light in and this took someone who was functionally blind and allowed them to see shapes
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.