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.
there's a strong argument to be made about including meat for protein adequacy and nutrient adequacy especially in like developing countries where they don't eat a lot of meat because of that poverty factor and they actually suffer things like growth stunting during childhood and trying to give them meat solves the issue by supplying zinc and protein and other nutrients they need to overcome those issues
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.