Peter Attia· MD
if you were in a group let's say and let's say i make you 35 again and i say your chances of having an infarct or a stroke before you're 65 are 30 now that's a number you can deal with that's a number that has meaning
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.
if you were in a group let's say and let's say i make you 35 again and i say your chances of having an infarct or a stroke before you're 65 are 30 now that's a number you can deal with that's a number that has meaning
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 were in a group let's say and let's say I make you 35 again and I say your chances of having an infarct or a stroke before you're 65 or 30 percent now that's a number you can deal with that's a number that has meaning
when somebody's at a a 30% chance like one and three that's a that's a number most people can understand and it starts to become a truly individually meaning a meaningful number for an individual when somebody's at 7.8% risk I you know that's that's that's tough to absorb in in a in any way that means something