Peter Attia· MD
these brand new scanners are faster which is why they're giving you less radiation um they have better you know and they have they seem to have better resolution
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.
these brand new scanners are faster which is why they're giving you less radiation um they have better you know and they have they seem to have better resolution
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.
I would go with the machine that has the best resolution and if 25 is if the radiologist tells me that the that that image is significantly better than a 2.5 uh milliseceiver exposure
and the good news is these brand new scanners are faster which is why they're giving you less radiation um they have better you know and they have they seem to have better resolution