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.
I do think it's important because of the critical time sensitive nature of bipolar disorder and the urgency of getting treatments early to try and prevent some of the longer lasting neural circuit changes that if people can avoid some of the less effective or demonstrated to be ineffective treatments, that they stand to combat bipolar disorder much more successfully.
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.