Rhonda Patrick· PhD
What we found was the mitochondria were healthy, or in the sense, they did not...they may not, maybe they were not producing as much of the reactive oxygen species.
Loading…
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.
What we found was the mitochondria were healthy, or in the sense, they did not...they may not, maybe they were not producing as much of the reactive oxygen species.
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.
Yeah, so all those seven parameters improved to some extent.
So what we found was when these flies eat only for 12 hours, they don't develop that arrhythmia as quickly as the normal flies do, so they are protected from this heart disease.
But in flies, when we introduce later in life, they were also protected. The arrhythmia reduced in flies.
And when we gave high-fat diet to flies, they also produced arrhythmia and many heart conditions that we see in humans and those were also protected in flies.