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.
we showed in 2005 in a Science paper that when you take a calorie-restricted rat and look at its organs...we looked at the liver and muscle, the levels of one of the sirtuin genes, number one, we have seven of these genes. So we looked at number one because we only had an antibody in those days to number one. It went up dramatically. I think it was about five to tenfold in levels in the calorie-restricted livers.
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.