Audit a URL →

Sign in Sign up free

Loading…

Weekly · Sunday Morning

Five longevity claims.
Worth your time.
Every Sunday.

Last Sunday

Rapamycin extends mouse lifespan 9–14%
NAD+ precursors reverse aging in humans
Blue-light glasses improve sleep quality
Walking 10 min after meals blunts glucose
Verdict change — caffeine half-life downgraded

5 audits·1 verdict change·0 affiliate links·Every Sunday

Joining 1,247 readers — founders, MDs, and longevity-obsessed people who fact-check their own health decisions.

Browse

Decisions Claims Content Creators

Product

Audit a URL Sunday roundup API (soon)Pricing

About

FAQ Methodology Editorial Standards Corrections Press & brand RSS feed

Legal

Terms of Service Privacy Policy DMCA

Finally, something serious in this space.
Because we actually read the papers.

© 2026 Whalespan. Independent, evidence-graded longevity.

188 - [AMA #30 Sneak Peek] How to Read and Understand Scientific Studies — Whalespan

Content›Video›188 - [AMA #30 Sneak Peek] H…

188 - [AMA #30 Sneak Peek] How to Read and Understand Scientific Studies

Peter Attia32m · 2021-12-20

Claims Made

37

Claims Supported

28

Support Rate

76%

Support rate

28 of 37 claims supported

28 supported9 partial / not

Claims from this content

25

✓Well SupportedPhase one clinical trials escalate drug dosage to determine toxicity and potential efficacy.✓Well SupportedRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for research, aiming to eliminate bias by randomly assigning participants to treatment groups.◐Partially SupportedPhase one clinical trials determine if a molecule is safe to administer to humans in single and multiple doses.◐Partially SupportedPhase two trials can range from 20-50 people up to a few hundred and may lack randomization, which can introduce bias.Not Supported

More from Peter Attia

Peter Attia on Zone 2 Cardio

Peter Attia on Rapamycin (with Matt Kaeberlein)

Attia walks back the clinic protocol: too aggressive for healthy adults

Discussion

Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this content — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.

M

Share your read of this content…

Posting publicly as you · linked to your social profiles

Sort by:

AV

A. Volkovreader

4h

Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.

NP

N. Park

2d

Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.

✕

A meta-analysis is not necessarily superior to a randomized controlled trial.

◐Partially SupportedNon-randomized trials can introduce bias because treatments are assigned to groups without randomization.

◐Partially SupportedA compound succeeds in phase two trials if it shows no unacceptable adverse safety effects and demonstrates efficacy.

◐Partially SupportedComparing groups where individuals self-select into treatments without randomization introduces bias.

◐Partially SupportedPhase four studies gather additional information and explore other indications after a drug is approved.

◐Partially SupportedPhase two trials are often open-label, using presumed effective and safe doses without a control arm.

◐Partially SupportedDetermining the number of subjects for a study requires a power analysis.

◐Partially SupportedPhase three clinical trials are large-scale, randomized, blinded studies comparing standard of care versus standard of care plus a new agent to detect side effects and measure efficacy.

◐Partially SupportedGood scientific research is generally hypothesis-driven, starting with a null hypothesis stating no relationship between phenomena and an alternative hypothesis stating a relationship exists.

◐Partially SupportedIndividual case reports are not generalizable to broader patient populations and cannot be used to comment on intervention outcomes.

◐Partially SupportedA single, rigorous randomized controlled trial may be more valuable than a meta-analysis of multiple flawed studies.

◐Partially SupportedIndividual studies within a meta-analysis should be examined before accepting the meta-analysis as definitive.

◐Partially SupportedPre-clinical work for a drug requires filing an Investigational New Drug (IND) application with the FDA.

◐Partially SupportedDrug approval for broad use is based on data from phase one, phase two, and phase three clinical trials.

◐Partially SupportedSemaglutide is undergoing phase 4 trials to investigate its use for obesity, expanding beyond its original indication for diabetes.

◐Partially SupportedA randomized controlled experiment is an elegant method for testing hypotheses, ideally with blinding.

✕Not SupportedA meta-analysis of poor-quality studies will result in a poor-quality meta-analysis.

◐Partially SupportedPhase 4 trials may reveal different side effects in populations without the specific condition for which the drug was originally approved.

◐Partially SupportedAn individual case report detailing a melanoma patient with elevated calcium due to parathyroid hormone-related hormone can be hypothesis-generating and aid future diagnoses.

◐Partially SupportedResearchers must determine primary and secondary outcomes, get protocol approval, develop a statistical plan, and pre-register studies before conducting them.

◐Partially SupportedA case series examines multiple patients to identify patterns or observations, effectively doing the same type of analysis as a case report but in plural.