Peter Attia· MD
and and also just the way we medically manage patients around the surgery there's we give medicine to decreased blood loss and and so the whole process is has become uh much more efficient and uh safer to be honest
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.
and and also just the way we medically manage patients around the surgery there's we give medicine to decreased blood loss and and so the whole process is has become uh much more efficient and uh safer to be honest
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 a lot of the approaches are different now and honestly in every aspect of the surgery technology has helped us so back when I was training as a resident almost all of the hip replacements were done through a posterior approach and approach through the back muscles so which muscles were actually getting cut so the gluteus muscles which are huge right and now you go anteriorly now I don't perform it's not one of the surgeries that I perform hip replacements but it's much easier to spare the muscle and the ligaments when you do an anterior approach that is an approach from the front