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.
Yes. Just like your knee-jerk reaction is to always eat something that's sweeter, more calorie dense. Yes. You know, it's it's >> okay. So, that's a mis we have a mismatch. We're designed to be motivated to seek out these foods and we have to expend energy to get high calorie foods.
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.
Like, why is it that when I walk into the pantry and I see a candy bar versus a cheese stick or something, I want to eat the candy bar? Well, that's evolution. Like I can't I make a choice not to do it, but it would be silly for me not to appreciate how much my brain looks at the candy bar and sees the sweetness, the energy density, the fat, the sugar, and it's like, yeah, that's what I want. Versus like, you know, pick the bland, healthier option.