Peter Attia· MD
and then it can also make signaling things go awry
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.
and then it can also make signaling things go awry
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.
and that back end has to happen fast in order to keep this ratio skewed so you have mainly nad and not too much nadh and that's really important because when that nadh starts creeping up all sorts of things start going wrong such as well nadh going up will uh drive too many electrons in the electron transport chain and going back to uh nav you know he's done a spectacular job showing how that leads to production of free radicals and so when you you need the right amount of this but this is a clear way to get toxic amounts of free radicals if you have nadh buildup secondly it just gums up metabolism if you have too much nadh relative to nad and so then you can get into problems not having enough atp