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.
And so it's very much kind of within the normal range, and I think totally assumed that a lot of people have these sorts of things. And as long, I think something as a psychiatric diagnosis when it severely impairs your ability to function and that's when we kind of cross that threshold.
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.
Like, you could have any number of symptoms, but literally every psychiatric diagnosis requires that it has to be disrupting someone's social or occupational functioning.