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.
And that's what I try to bring to the table that in order to study other diseases where mitochondrial dysfunction is at the epicenter as well, we need to understand what perfection is in order to understand imperfection. And what we see in people with type 2 diabetes, for example, they are on the opposite metabolic pole of what a world-class cyclist or runner is.
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.
Because if you want to understand athletes, how to fix an example of arguably the most effective mitochondria, why not at least study what the perfect mitochondria look like? Is that a fair statement? Exactly, yes.