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.
the person who starves themselves to the point where they might die and in some cases sadly do die, they can know perfectly well that their behavior is leading to bad outcomes and possibly even death. And yet they are not able to intervene unless they get particular clinical help because the homeostatic processes, the signals from the body and brain that say you need food, those aren't registering in the same way that they are for other individuals.
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.