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.
but then when you said to get curious about it um feels like it kind of drops down a little bit and kind of kind of Moves In A little maybe softens a little bit so you do feel curious toward it yeah all right so go ahead and ask it what it wants you to know about itself silently up to you either way whichever more comfortable well since this is a podcast and none of this is comfortable anyway for me to do in public
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.