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.
I think people should also be checking doing a CGM at at least one point in their life doing a continuous blood glucose monitor I think you can also check inflammatory markers and if you don't want to do a CGM you can do a just a finger blood stick finger stick glucose postprandial ii and compare that to your fasting glucose and look for that post prandial excursion
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.
check your fasting insulin check a continuous glucose monitor from a company like nutrisense know what you're working with
get a fasting insulin wear a continuous glucose monitor
but start with a fasting insulin then triangulate it with a fasting glucose get a hemoglobin a1c if you want to know what your average blood sugar over the last three months has been or wear a continuous glucose monitor from a company like nutrisense
Post-meal glucose spikes in non-diabetics drive long-term cardiometabolic disease independently of HbA1c.
Wearing a continuous glucose monitor leads to personalized dietary improvements that hold up beyond 12 weeks.
Continuous glucose monitors meaningfully change behavior in non-diabetic adults beyond the first month.
CGM use in metabolically healthy adults induces orthorexic-style dietary anxiety without health benefit.