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.
digby sale had a very really great paper reviewing kind of all the work that had been done where he suggested that most training studies are only documenting a certain aspect of an actual person's training age so they're they're never going to be able to actually answer this question because the studies are too short
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.
and it really does seemingly come from those two studies and then Digby sale had a very really great paper reviewing kind of all the work that had been done
where he suggested that uh most training studies are only documenting a certain aspect of an actual person's training age so they're they're never going to be able to actually answer this question because the studies are too short