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.
make them better across the board by every objective measure of both primary and secondary aging the secondary stuff's so obvious it's not even worth talking about so people that are interested in that can go back and look at the papers and see the lipid profiles and see the insulin sensitivity but um but it's really these primary markers of Aging I didn't I I had forgotten or didn't know about the thymic fat reduction that's very interesting to me
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.
so um talk to me about the lipid changes the markers of insulin sensitivity the body composition changes let's just kind of run through the list of of of what what improved again I I I I I don't think it's a surprise that these things improved but but the magnitude in some cases is interesting