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.
are there a lot of lists out there that are incorrect they haven't been tested and retested enough times to say how much of it is because there's different varieties or different seasons or variability we don't know
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.
you have to actually be able to test each variety and designate what variety you're testing and then repeat those tests over a number of years to see if there's any real variation in these plants and maybe source differently grown differently but that takes real money you'd have to invest huge amounts of money in each food to get a real sense of how variable the oxley content is and it hasn't been done