The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
so what would you want them to be looking for so uh what I would normally do is is a one I would try to create as some standardized protocol from time to time and that means not only the testing itself but also what happens a little bit before without it it becomes too invasive into people's lives like standardizing what you do the days before and all these kind of things I think this is Impractical for most people
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.
other mistakes I've seen are people who don't have a long enough warm-up time you know the the the total test took 5 minutes and I'm like well you didn't you didn't come close to sufficiently warming up
that's exactly why we're discussing should you warm up or should you not warm up yes you should because it would normally give you let's say a better result when you are warmed up but that means also that the protocol will also have can also then have an influence on your vew to Max measurements
other mistakes I've seen are people who don't have a long enough warm-up time you know the the the total test took five minutes and I'm like well you you didn't you didn't come close to sufficiently warming up