Peter Attia· MD
you you really do want people who are gonna i mean it's morbid to say this but you're looking for people whose risk of death in the next five years is is high enough that you're going to move the needle
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.
you you really do want people who are gonna i mean it's morbid to say this but you're looking for people whose risk of death in the next five years is is high enough that you're going to move the needle
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.
you know it's almost like you want to take the patient population that predimed started with because this was a primary prevention study for cardiovascular disease that found a statistical significant difference in under five years i think it was four and a half years they expected to go for seven um so so it's you're really looking for that type of population you you you really do want people who are gonna i mean it's morbid to say this but you're looking for people whose risk of death in the next five years is is high enough that you're going to move the needle
uh you know first of all we needed to do look to st to start a study at 50 where you have to show mortality is a 20-year study we we we cannot afford it