Peter Attia· MD
i think maybe it's making the muscle uh biology better but it's not making the muscle any better
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.
i think maybe it's making the muscle uh biology better but it's not making the muscle any better
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.
I think maybe it's making the muscle a biology better but it's not making the muscle any better sorry just to be clear you're saying that the women in the bottom uh quartile say of igf are no more likely to be sarcopenic than the women with higher igf but they do tend to live longer and smarter and cognitively they have better cognitive function right yeah
I'm not sure that low igf is the best way to preserve muscle I think maybe it's making the muscle a biology better but it's not making the muscle any better