Peter Attia· MD
but sequencing technologies have advanced um to a degree that now you know from a single 10ml tube of blood and particularly one collected over time
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.
but sequencing technologies have advanced um to a degree that now you know from a single 10ml tube of blood and particularly one collected over time
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.
there has been just an enormous advance in terms of methods for detecting like you know single alleles a single uh fragments of genes in the bloodstream so it turns out that normal cells shed DNA in the in the bloodstream it is digested and broken down you know reasonably quickly but not immediately cancer cells do this also as it turns out and the more cancer you have in your body of course the more well maybe maybe that's not so obvious but it is true that the more cancer that is in the body the more of the copies of cancer DNA that will actually be shed in the bloodstream but sequencing technologies have advanced to a degree that now you know from a single 10 milliliter tube of blood