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.
but what if it's not what if it's only one or two or or 0.5 then you have to recalculate the whole thing and now somebody has potentially you know 800 800 calories less in their diet per day well now maybe their caloric deficiency and that's why they're not having a period or their menstrual cycle change or something
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.