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.
there was like a study published on that too like a bunch of Bio biological markers of aging and biomarkers of Aging were measured and then like there was like people looked at pictures and like ranked their their age and their their you know quote-unquote biomarker biological age so like according to all these biomarkers that basically say they're chronological age maybe older than their biological age where they looked like their biological age not their chronological age
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.