Peter Attia· MD
those were the two formulations that had been extensively studied in the observational studies where the results had looked very promising for a lower risk of heart disease and cognitive decline all cause mortality
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.
those were the two formulations that had been extensively studied in the observational studies where the results had looked very promising for a lower risk of heart disease and cognitive decline all cause 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.
yes so back in the 1980s and 1990s there were several observational studies these are not randomized clinical trials but large observational studies looking at women who chose to be on hormone therapy or whom doctors were prescribing hormone therapy for and they did tend to have lower rates of heart disease in those studies compared to women not using hormone therapy they also seem to have more favorable outcomes such as less cognitive decline line lower all-cause mortality rates they were generally doing better