Peter Attia· MD
you don't have that luxury in these fragmented populations and that's one of the major components of uh of anthropocene extinctions
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.
you don't have that luxury in these fragmented populations and that's one of the major components of uh of anthropocene extinctions
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.
if you decimated the population by 90 and there were only 33 million people left presumably we would no longer continue to be the united states of america we would be a whole bunch of disparate tribes in total chaos therefore we'd be a heck of a lot more susceptible is that a fair assessment yes yes and that's the you know in in in the military they talk about talk about defeating your enemy in detail meaning that if they're fragmented you you don't have to deal with the whole population you could just do it one at a time and and yes i think those are the case that's the case
Whole-body MRI screening in healthy adults produces more incidentaloma harm than cancer-mortality benefit.
Starting colonoscopy screening at 45 (vs 50) prevents enough early-onset cancers to justify the population cost.
Multi-cancer liquid-biopsy tests like Galleri detect early cancers at a stage that meaningfully improves survival.