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 the individuals who are totally deficient in LPL have know LPL on any cell type it's hard to imagine how they function does that mean they're completely dependent on glycolysis they are able to take up the fatty acids they don't need the LPL to break down the triglyceride they do fine I mean in terms of being able to there's nothing wrong with their manipulation or movement of fatty acid and that's probably why they have normal adipose tissue and normal muscle
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.
but it was known that individuals who had total lipoprotein lipase deficiency and there are such individual on a genetic basis had very very high levels of circulating triglyceride I mean these can be life-threatening in terms of the levels that are reached but they had perfectly normal adipose tissue so this suggested that maybe LPL wasn't critical or an absolute meaning as you would expect those patients to have sky-high triglycerides and be emaciated yes and they weren't and they aren't