Peter Attia· MD
which again that also completely flies in the face of traditional nutrition science which says 5 to 6% is the limit for gastric tolerability and is the sweet spot for absorption right at 5 to 6%
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.
which again that also completely flies in the face of traditional nutrition science which says 5 to 6% is the limit for gastric tolerability and is the sweet spot for absorption right at 5 to 6%
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.
that's optimizing for water absorption into the cell not your primary Point you're probably overdoing it on liquid and you're trying to maximize glucose into the cell but but also absorption here is because this is also where it's interesting or important then to go back to also a little bit like what is this research like who is this research done on as well and it's not done on these trained athletes yeah