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 in some patients you really want to see that DHEA preference preferentially higher versus the EPA and it does depend quite a bit on what which access were most worried about whether it be the neuro degenerative axis in which case the DHEA might be a little more important or the atherosclerosis in which the EPA might be more important
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.
may be quite different than dha so if you're more focused on vascular disease and perhaps the small embolic or thrombotic atherosclerotic strokes then an epa application may make more sense but if you're looking at the synapse and what it requires to form neurotransmission we think from a dha perspective