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.
we published a paper recently looking at in something like 3500 people that are submitted blood to us and have told us how much oily fish they eat and whether they take a supplement or not that's all we asked and we found out that the group that has the 50/50 chance of an eight percent omega-3 index we're eating free reported eating three oily fish meals a week and taking a supplement but below that the chances of having eight percent or diminish two minutes
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.