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.
we should be thinking of training as combining different concepts to a given goal. Because often, doing some lighter-load training with some heavier-load training, if possible, sometimes that's not possible but sometimes it is, doing, you know, like I said, some power training with heavier-load training or lighter-load moderate training, these are things that, ultimately, can optimize the effects for a given goal.
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.