Andrew Huberman· PhD
if indeed there is something that can reduce the risk of basil and squel carcinomas that may be a rationale for taking it and I should say that basil and Squam Cel carcinomas are very very common
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.
if indeed there is something that can reduce the risk of basil and squel carcinomas that may be a rationale for taking it and I should say that basil and Squam Cel carcinomas are very very common
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.
this one study found somewhere between a 60 and 80% reduction in basil cell and squa cell carcinomas I found no difference in melanomas
if indeed um NR and/or nmn reduce the risk that significantly of sell and basal so carcinomas I think you could make a case that if you're an individual who's at risk for those things