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.
and by that time this was again by the mid 80s now and and the work of the danish investigators dyerburg and bang and greenland eskimos linking omega-3 with reduced atherosclerosis that was becoming well-known then and so we were all kind of getting on this omega-3 bandwagon
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.
and the work of the danish investigators dyerburg and bang and greenland eskimos linking omega-3 with reduced atherosclerosis that was becoming well-known then