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 believe is adapted to consume these things and deal with them even if they're not beneficial I think a lot of plants are just largely neutral that's that's where I'd lie and I think that you know we have eaten them in varying amounts throughout our evolution and if they were things that could that would debilitate us in any significant manner we wouldn't have been able to survive where we are today
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.
we have a physiology that I believe is adapted to consume these things and deal with them even if they're