The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
At least when we look at the receptor we found for leucine, and then we look at the concentrations at which it might bind the other branched -chain amino acids, we don't think those affinities are relevant. Particularly valine is way too low. Isoleucine maybe in some situations could act through the receptor, but unlikely.
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.
mTORC in muscle has a higher affinity for leucine than mTORC1 in fat or hepatocytes, which may preferentially signal muscle growth during nutrient deprivation.