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 think for these people it's pretty clear that those blood glucose spikes are not harmful for humans and there's and we're confusing it and saying oh in a diabetic when someone has diabetic physiology and they Spike their blood sugar they get endothelial dysfunction well that person is diabetic and the blood glucose spike is you know tied to other things and their insulin resistant it's very complex physiology
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.
I also believe that there's been a lot of discussion around fearing glucose spikes and I wanted to attack this head-on because I think this is not something humans should generally be afraid of