Peter Attia· MD
but the risk does seem to be a little greater in women suggesting that there may be some true biological effects maybe weight mediated Beyond just confounding by socioeconomic and cultural factors
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.
but the risk does seem to be a little greater in women suggesting that there may be some true biological effects maybe weight mediated Beyond just confounding by socioeconomic and cultural factors
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.
there were a couple studies where they assessed number of children and men and parody is actually a risk factor for CBD and men too
when you look at parity or the number of live births there does seem to be a j Point J shape relationship with higher parity particularly more than four or five live births being associated with subsequent risk of cardiovascular disease
there were a couple studies where they assessed number of children and men and parody is actually a risk factor for CBD in men too so this likely gets to your point about confounding by social economic factors and cultural factors education factors that might lead a family to have more children rather than less