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.
So something anecdotally that there are many of us that do a lot of fat grafting and we were on a panel one day talking about it before we knew about the stem cells being in the fat. We're talking 15 20 years ago and we're talking about the fat grafting patients and how they all uniformly look like they just age better and their skin ages better and now realize it's all of that.
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.
I do like fat because it's your own living tissue and of course it has those stem cells in it that can become multiple different types of tissue. So if you place it at the perryostial level it can build bone. If you put it in fat it becomes fat and if you put it along muscle it can turn into muscle and if you put it um under the skin it enhances how the skin ages.