Peter Attia· MD
what do you think is the uh i mean i assume there are pretty clear tables on what the decade by decade drop of maximal aerobic output is
Loading…
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.
what do you think is the uh i mean i assume there are pretty clear tables on what the decade by decade drop of maximal aerobic output 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.
I mean the problem with the tables is that they they they draw a nice smooth line you lose I think it's 9% per decade or something like that is at least in the once you get into your 70s it gets steeper there's an inflection point the the sort of revised thinking is that that's that works on a population level but what actually happens is the decline is not that steep for any individual
I lose I think it's 9% per decade or something like that is at least in the once you get into your 70s it gets steeper there's an inflection point