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 think that what they do is they take us out of the cortex, right? Because that's where we run into these problems. That's where we bounce things over and over again that the distress centers deepen our brain and the brain stem kind of align with the outer parts of the cortex and they say, right, we we're in distress. We want to stay alive.
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.
the data coming from the the labs and the academic centers um is so powerfully positive. These are used in professional hands and with the right kind of guidance are extremely powerful tools but used in the right way. What happens is we see less communication or less chatter in the outer parts of the brain right in the outer parts of the cortex. That's where language is, that's where vision is. That's where executive function is. So planning and t task execution. So so much of that is about making our way in the world around us. And I think when we take the neurotransmission out of those places, right, and we set it in a part of the brain and say the insular cortex, right? The parts of the brain that are sort of in the middle, right? Which which I think I believe is where our humanness really is.