Free to start. No advice, no hype — just clear thinking about how science actually works. Unsubscribe anytime.
A new study makes headlines, and the guidelines don't change. A closer look at why the lag between research and clinical recommendations is intentional—and what it takes for evidence to actually shift practice.
Scientific recommendations keep changing, and it feels like experts can't make up their minds. An exploration of why this happens, what separates genuine revision from flip-flopping, and how to interpret changing guidance more carefully.
Mouse research has powered major medical advances. It has also led to many promising ideas that never worked in humans. A closer look at when mouse studies are useful and when headlines get ahead of evidence.
Health studies often report clear results—but those results don’t apply equally to everyone. A closer look at how study design limits generalizability and how to read health claims more carefully.
‘Statistically significant’ sounds definitive—but it's not the same as large, important, or clinically meaningful. A closer look at what the term actually measures, why it's so often misunderstood, and how to read research claims more carefully.
Biomarkers dominate headlines and health claims, but a change in a biomarker is not the same thing as a change in health. An examination of what biomarkers actually measure, when they reliably predict patient outcomes, and why promising results often fail to translate into real benefits.
Scientific headlines often hinge on a single study, promising clear answers. But individual studies are designed to answer narrow questions, not deliver universal truths. An exploration of why replication matters, how evidence accumulates, and how to read new research more carefully.
'Backed by science' sounds reassuring—but what does it actually mean? A closer look at how scientific evidence is built, interpreted, and often oversimplified.
The Methods Section is written by Sarah Warner, a research scientist with a background in molecular biology, neuroscience, and genomics. It exists because the gap between how research is done and how it gets communicated to the public is wider than it should be — and that gap has real consequences.