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.
you know glucose is a nutrient you know fructose and glucose together and sucrose and plant foods that is something that humans need and animals need reducing that just because a plant compound reduces that we chase this in diabetes and think that's a good thing for diabetes but that's actually depriving us of a nutrient
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.