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.
so to my knowledge uh with blood flow restriction how we use it shinohara published the first paper in 1998 where they had individuals that all they were looking at was strength but they had one leg do a certain exercise with blood flow restriction the opposite leg did the same exercise without blood flow restriction and they saw a treatment effect meaning the limb that underwent blood flow restriction saw a greater change
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.