Andrew Huberman· PhD
That comes from twin studies and family studies. Uh so although it's thought that for people live to be a hundred or older then it might be higher. Some people have said 60%.
Loading…
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.
That comes from twin studies and family studies. Uh so although it's thought that for people live to be a hundred or older then it might be higher. Some people have said 60%.
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.
it’s ~10% genetic, 10% lifestyle, 75% luck and 5% experimental error 😉 https://t.co/arRPzuLmsi
genes play a significant role so genes don't seem to play a big role in people living to 70 versus 80 but boy when you start to talk about living to 90 versus 100 you know relative to 70 or 80. genes play a pretty big role