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'm going to pick a sport where the optimization is around my ability to be as physically robust as possible in the last decade of my life which you know means I want to be able to do a bunch of things that most people can't even fathom when they're you know 80 or 90 years old
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.
Um, and then each of those activities is deconstructed into movement patterns and uh physiologic requirements. Um and we we've gotten pretty good at this now. This was this took a couple of years to really really get down to as close as we could go from an art to a science. And then for each of those activities, we look at the requirements, the movement requirements, the strength requirements, the physiological requirements, and parameters all across the board.