Rhonda Patrick· PhD
when they were getting up to like more like nine, I mean, you're talking, it was like 50% reduction in cardiovascular mortality, 40% reduction in cancer-related mortality.
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.
when they were getting up to like more like nine, I mean, you're talking, it was like 50% reduction in cardiovascular mortality, 40% reduction in cancer-related mortality.
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 look at the VPA studies okay so say you're doing four minutes a day of vila well then what is that that's equivalent to maybe for cardiovascular disease that's equivalent to 45 minutes a day of moderate activity or um you know 100 maybe 200 minutes of low inensity physical activity.
these studies even at first I was kind of like well how is it you know okay let's say 10 10 minutes a day you're doing that every day so that's what 70 minutes it was even less than that was 9 minutes so it was even less right so like you're like okay around 70 minutes a week I'm getting a 50% reduction in in cardiovascular related mortality but the guidelines say 75 minutes a week is the minimum now I get it like this study is saying no we underestimated what the vigorous you know activity really is giving you in terms of benefit for these health outcomes, right?