Rhonda Patrick· PhD
So what we have seen is when we, in experimental animals, if they don't have a clock, then their metabolism goes really weird.
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 what we have seen is when we, in experimental animals, if they don't have a clock, then their metabolism goes really weird.
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 what we have seen is when we, in experimental animals, if they don't have a clock, then their metabolism goes really weird. So just like I said, a metabolism works like this traffic signal in downtown, and if they're not timed properly, then there'll be disease. Similarly, for very long time we knew in the field that mice that don't have circadian clock because they lack a gene or have a mutation, they have various metabolic defect. They have obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, etc.