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.
So, women that come to me and say, "Hey, I went to the fertility specialist." It's IVF is the is the prescribed treatment. It's 20 to 30K and it's not root cause, right? And so, when we see these infertile women in the in the prairies, right, in the corn and soybean in their backyard, they always have elevated levels of pesticides and we know these are teroggens. These are damaging. So, even if the woman does get pregnant, there's a potential for birth defects.
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.