Peter Attia· MD
I forget the metrics that um I I believe you want to be beneath 28 seconds of ground contact time I think that's the number
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.
I forget the metrics that um I I believe you want to be beneath 28 seconds of ground contact time I think that's the number
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 could get people down into a ground contact time of like 0. 2 to 0.25 it that's going to translate to exactly what you're saying because the way you describe it like the the sort of rolling foot on the ground like you're never going to get forced that way you're just spending you could be spending you know 6 seconds on the ground when you're rolling your foot across it instead you want to be like hitting it super quickly and getting up