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.
The food intake pattern in Okinawa has been different from that in other regions of Japan people there have never been influenced by Buddhism hence there is no taboo regarding eating habits eating meat was not stigmatized and consumption of pork and goat was historically high the meat intake was higher in Okinawa they say unexpectedly we did not find any vegetarians among the centenarians in Okinawa
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.
we did not find any vegetarians among the centenarians
And in this study, they did not find any centenarians among the vegetarians.