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.
yeah there's actually a neurophysiological recruitment so now creatine has been touted as a new neurot transmitter so this is quite interesting it actually seems to release a lot of things from a neuromuscular uh uh uh perspective effective but the biggest thing is the ability to recruit not only type one but these type two muscle fibers as well
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.
we think muscle fiber recruitment primarily type two muscle fibers is one of the main reasons