Paul Saladino· MD
I think eating bones is something that is not as foreign evolutionarily as people would imagine
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.
I think eating bones is something that is not as foreign evolutionarily as people would imagine
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.
you know if you it's difficult to say the RDA for calcium for most people is gonna be a couple of grams of calcium which you know would be a couple of bytes of bone would give you plenty of calcium a lot of people think that you should consider balancing your calcium and your phosphorus that's kind of something that is familiar to veterinarians and veterinary medicine the calcium phosphorus balance we don't think about it so much in Western medicine but there's a little bit of phosphorus in bones but you know I think if you get a couple of grams and bone you'll be fine in terms of your calcium phosphorus balance so it's not much you don't have to eat a whole bone but a couple of bytes of bone a day it's gonna be plenty for most people