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.
um there was a paper in 2004 by David Reddish talking about um addiction as a computational disease gone arai where you keep feeding system um a level of dopamine by putting a drug in that c blocks its re-uptake that it can't anticipate, right? And so it keeps chasing that and it never gets there.
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.