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.
In the meta analysis, there was actually a recent network meta analysis looking at markers of adiposity, HbA1c, a bunch of different health markers, and when you substitute, we'll call it non-nutritive sweeteners, and stevia is not artificial. But so when you substitute NNS for the sugar-sweetened beverages, you see improvements in a lot of different things.
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.