Rhonda Patrick· PhD
I think it's the evidence suggesting that high-intensity activate activates more of these biological changes so I think of it kind of as stirring the biological soup right
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.
I think it's the evidence suggesting that high-intensity activate activates more of these biological changes so I think of it kind of as stirring the biological soup right
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.
because we're targeting biological changes as opposed to functional changes we want to go with what we think is the optimal exercise prescription for re really driving biological changes that might be relevant for cancer growth