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.
if we look at the studies that have been done it's very clear when we look at fasting glucose and a1c and mortality large studies in Korea the sweet spot is right around 75 for fasting glucose and if we're doing things that elevate our fasting glucose above that I have real concerns about that
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.
if we look at the population studies there's a big study out of Korea and again this is epidemiology but it's pretty clear data that a fasting glucose of about 70 to 80 it's kind of a sweet spot above 80 maybe not so good for longevity
and now um I'm getting readings more like 80 which is like considered really perfect you know that's really considered perfect blood glucose if you wake up in the morning you're fasting blood glucose is 80 um that's ideal