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.
these compounds all have what are cut we could consider side effects they're not technically side effects they all have regions in the body or mechanisms in the body where they're damaging for humans but we're only told about the benefits
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.
these molecules are like any other molecule you will get at the pharmacy they have side effects this is a package insert they are exogenous molecules that do not participate in any of the biochemistry of humans intrinsically they are only introduced as foreign molecules
molecular hormesis or xenohormesis xeno is a prefix that means alien that is when we introduce a molecule like sulforaphane into our body or resveratrol or curcumin in the hopes that it will affect our biology in this case in the case of sulforaphane it acts as an oxidative stressor and turns on nrf2