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.
they looked at the health outcomes of people whose diet was largely consisting of government subsidized Foods they and they tracked their data their health outcomes for several years and they found that people who were eating the most government subsidized Foods had about a 30% increased incidence of obesity higher rates of uh diabetes higher rates of BMI and excessive body fat higher markers of inflammation the list goes on and on they were not doing well
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.