Peter Attia· MD
there's a there's a another bit of this and that is that the resistance costs something um you know to be able to deal with a toxic uh pesticide or toxic drug you know you have to have the molecular machinery necessary to
Loading…
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.
there's a there's a another bit of this and that is that the resistance costs something um you know to be able to deal with a toxic uh pesticide or toxic drug you know you have to have the molecular machinery necessary to
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.
and so now the guys that are not resistant don't have to carry that machinery around with them are more fit and so there's this then subtle competition that goes on so you'll be selecting for resistance in let's say the three quarters of the field but when the one when the ones that are sensitive move into that area they have a benefit they have the benefit of not having this uh pesticide being applied to them anymore there's no selection for resistance and their fitness advantage will be such that the that when the uh when the pest population comes back to something close to what it was the beginning it's as sensitive as it was in the in the beginning