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.
you don't lose these functionalities because of Aging you lose these because of a loss of training to state that again you don't lose these because of some innate physiological thing that happens with genes become less sensitive or you lose functionality you pretty much can describe the loss of function of strength and muscle in aging as exclusively because of a loss of training in nutrition and and anabolic resistance and some other things
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.
these two factors suggest that activity might be the main determinant of anabolic resistance an an aging individual or age within an individual is simply a proxy for activity
And that's really the bottom line here. That's the most important thing. If there's a public health health message, you know, in this episode, it really is you should be training.
If you're a 65, 70 year old male listening to this episode and you're engaging resistance training, you're likely not experiencing much anabolic resistance. Maybe a little, but not much.
But it also means that staying physically active and strength training often is the key to preventing "age-related" anabolic resistance.