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 wonder if they would be more or less susceptible to the belief system yeah that's a really good question right because they have no prior to compare it to they have no Pleasant they have no experience to compare it to with respect to the obviously beneficial effects of nicotine that the smokers are well used to
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.
for people that are naive to nicotine even a small amount of nicotine is likely to get this pathway activated to such a great degree sort of like the first time effect of pretty much any drug
I wonder if they would be more or less susceptible to the belief system yeah that's a really good question right because they have no prior to compare it to they have no Pleasant they have no experience to compare it to with respect to the obviously beneficial effects of nicotine that the smokers are well used to
for people that are naive to nicotine even a small amount of nicotine is likely to get this pathway activated to such a great degree sort of like the first time effect of pretty much any drug