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.
there are two other things that can be put into that equation one is the physical forces are just much higher in magnitude — you know you're going to be putting a lot of tension through your connective tissues and through your muscle muscles when you're resistance training than you are when you're doing like bicycle work for example
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.
with high absolute forces the approximate damage and disruption to the body is graded exponentially and not linearly
the physical forces are just much higher in magnitude um you know you're going to be putting a lot of tension through your connective tissues and through your muscles when you're resistance training than you are when you're doing like bicycle work for example and so with high absolute forces the approximate damage and disruption to the body is graded exponentially and not linearly