I think it rubs plenty of laymen the wrong way to not make it a bit more explicitly known.

The world could use a bit less nuance in our headlines these days.

Topfi an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> [...] not make it a bit more explicitly known.

Honest question, how could it be made more explicitly known? It's literally under ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, in the most clear language possible.

	▲	SecretDreams 39 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The article title is fine. The title posted to HN (and other forums) should have outro or intro: In a study funded by X, "Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk" Or "Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk", in a study funded by X. This is a fair addendum that should be added when cross posting across websites. It need not be in the original link title. And this type of declaration should really follow most cross posted titles where a perceived bias/skepticism might otherwise be triggered without that knowledge being included. It's an explicit declaration upfront of potential conflicts.

It's never enough for purity tests.