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.
of course there is some bad intentions there's big food there's industry who wants to promote their products and sell whatever they produce and you know that's a different story and it is another a huge confounder both in nutrition and in other fields that we have very high penetrance of financial conflicts
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.
there is big food there's industry who wants to promote their products and sell whatever they produce and you know that's a different story and it is another a huge confounder both in nutrition and in other fields that we have very high penetrance of financial conflicts