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.
I've seen data that looks convincing that some in a man and some gets straight into the body goes to the liver some goes beyond the liver into the muscle and so it's messy and it's probably never gonna be one single answer to what's going on in the body with something this complicated
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.
there's some truth in that in a man gets broken down in the gut and then taken up by the gut and remade in the body into an ad because you're basically just pulling a powder you know a three piece Lego set putting it through the screener and then reassembling it on the other side that seems to happen too but also I've seen data that looks convincing that some in a man and some gets straight into the body goes to the liver some goes beyond the liver into the muscle and so it's messy
in the gut some evidence that people have published and some haven't points to the gut playing a major role in how much this actually gets into the body