Paul Saladino· MD
it's all about the good ones are okay when they're they're they exist for the appropriate duration, the appropriate location, >> and the appropriate concentration, >> right?
Loading…
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.
it's all about the good ones are okay when they're they're they exist for the appropriate duration, the appropriate location, >> and the appropriate concentration, >> right?
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.
It's not that free radicals are bad and it's not that free radicals are good. It's like everything in biology. Uh it's the Goldilocks rule. You might need more of it during this circumstance in this part of the body. You might need less of it in this circumstance at this totally different part of the body. And as a result, any strategy that would try to globally suppress it could even if successful in doing it, which we haven't been able to measure, might actually not yield to a favorable outcome.