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.
you also compared with a young um person's calf The Young and the Masters look identical you know the muscle volume and quality there's no fatty infiltration and the sub fat is is virtually non-existent whereas you look at somebody same age as the Master's athlete who's not active and you've got this shrunken down little sarcopenic muscle belly that fatty infiltration and a Big W of subq fat
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.
you only have to look at those beautiful studies that have shown MRIs of um Master's athletes Cals compared with an age matched person who's not active you see also compared with a young um person's calf The Young and the Masters look identical you know the muscle volume and quality there's no fatty infiltration and the sub fat is is vir non-existent whereas you look at somebody same age as the Master's athlete who's not active and you've got this shrunken down little sarcopenic muscle belly with a fatty infiltration and a Big W of subq fat