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.
This is a receptor that's in the surface of neurons or on the surface of neurons for which most of the time it's not active, but when something very extreme happens and there's a lot of activity in the neural pathway that impinges on that receptor, it opens and it allows the entry of molecules, ions that trigger a cellular process that we call long-term potentiation.
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.
This is a receptor that's in the surface of neurons or on the surface of neurons for which most of the time it's not active. But when something very extreme happens and there's a lot of activity in the neural pathway that impinges on that receptor, it opens. And it allows the entry of molecules, ions that trigger a cellular process that we call long-term potentiation. And long-term potentiation translates to a change in connectivity so that later, you don't need that intense event for the neuron to become active again.