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.
Yeah, um yeah, the advent of the continuous glucose monitor is amazing. You know, I know a lot of biohackers use them to kind of titrate in their glucose loads. You really don't know unless you test certain things. Yeah, if you're testing your body only at, you know, static state, you don't know what your pancreas is going to do when you put in a big load.
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.
you know the Advent of the continuous glucose monitor is amazing you know I know a lot of biohackers use them to kind of titrate in their glucose loads you really don't know unless you test certain things you know if you're testing your body only at you know static State you don't know what your pancreas is going to do when you put in a big load
CGM is hands down the best tool.
You can't fake the CGM day in and day out while your pancreas is acting nefariously. Eventually it shows b/c you overshoot insulin.
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.