Peter Attia· MD
for amyloid you get a very strong predictive signal you know 30s to 40s and then again sort of 60s to 70s
Loading…
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.
for amyloid you get a very strong predictive signal you know 30s to 40s and then again sort of 60s to 70s
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 tau it's actually somewhere in sort of the starts in the 50s to 60s and then goes through until the 80s
we just submitted a paper which I'm gonna blow now in terms of media sort of outlet it hasn't been accepted yet but we just tried to ask the question across someone's lifespan if you bucket them into 10-year decades and you ask what was the quantity and quality of their sleep from their 30s and 40s 40s and 50s 50s and 60s so on and so forth and then at the end of their life you stick them in a brain scanner and you map how much amyloid is in the brain and how much towers in the brain which is what we can do here at the sleep center and then you essentially can in a retrospective manner say was sleep at certain times of life more critical in predicting how much amyloid you will have late in life