Peter Attia· MD
With the muscle biopsy we saw in the 90s, the R, the correlation pre and post exercise, using the scale that we use.
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.
With the muscle biopsy we saw in the 90s, the R, the correlation pre and post exercise, using the scale that we use.
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.
So I developed with a colleague here, John Hill from the School of Medicine, we developed a methodology to indirectly look for glycogen content in a non-invasive way using ultrasound, high-frequency ultrasound. And we validated with the muscle biopsy as well. And another researcher, David Neiman, also validated the system.