Peter Attia· MD
and there's a hundred articles in the literature showing that the law you'll live longer on to bulking the more you can do bulk the tumour
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
and there's a hundred articles in the literature showing that the law you'll live longer on to bulking the more you can do bulk the tumour
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.
We do know that the more extensive the resection um the longer the survival is and that's been really well characterized now but it's not curative like you said we can remove 99% or even 100 and beyond what we see on the MRI.
The more that we can remove the tumor, the longer the survival.
We do know that the more extensive the resection um the longer the survival is and that's been really well characterized now but it's not curative like you said we can remove 99% or even 100 and beyond what we see on the MRI.
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.