so that by the time we start you know like we start hitting some very anaerobic stuff the system can respond very quickly and get back to aerobic very quickly
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.
so that by the time we start you know like we start hitting some very anaerobic stuff the system can respond very quickly and get back to aerobic very quickly
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.
Yeah, the you can pick the highest intensity thing you could possibly do and there's still um like anorobic and aerobic is not two different things. It's the same gear, right? It's just the top side and bottom side of the same gear. There's not different units. They're just, you know, the front side and the back side of it. So, they will always complement each other. They're not distinct things. Um I mean, and look at all of Georgia's work on lactate. Like we we know these answers now. This is not a one system. These are not different systems. These are just the different side of the same coin, right?