Peter Attia· MD
so even the Heritage mutations that we look at they disrupt mitochondrial function and if they disrupt mitochondrial function you are at risk for developing a neoplasm in that particular population themselves
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.
so even the Heritage mutations that we look at they disrupt mitochondrial function and if they disrupt mitochondrial function you are at risk for developing a neoplasm in that particular population themselves
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.
sometimes the viruses actually infect directly into the mitochondria they produce proteins in the mitochondria that screw up the electron transport chain other times the virus is integrated into the nuclear genome producing a protein product that then then disrupts them the mitochondria either way the mitochondria are disrupted
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.