I had thought the "Blue Zones" research was questionable. Now I'm sure it is.
They've pissed around just about long enough: how about some serious progress on a cure?
As Glenn Reynolds writes frequently, "Faster, please."
"The body automatically compensates during exercise and holds back at least 25 percent of the calories we might expect to expend."
While this paper is not in a top-notch journal, its finding is consistent with other research I've read.
Finds that higher magnesium intake is inversely correlated with incidence of pancreatic cancer. Since pancreatic cancer has the worst prognosis of all types of cancer, you may want to try to ensure you have an adequate intake of magnesium.
I wasn't worried about this, but now I'm really not worried.
Clearer than what we already think we know? I'd bet against it.
Michael Fumento with another of his pieces that are "almost as irrefutable as they are controversial" (Supposedly, the NY Times Book Review.) In this piece he argues that "long COVID" is probably disguised clinical depression. Here's part of the circumstantial evidence he cites:
Despite admonishments ad nauseam that “COVID doesn’t discriminate by age,” acute COVID patients are overwhelmingly elderly: the CDC indicates Americans 65-74 are six times more likely to be hospitalized and an amazing 95 times more likely to die than those age 18-29. Italian data show mean mortality at 80. Yet “long COVID” patients are overwhelmingly middle-aged, with the largest University College decile at 40-49 and the August Pragmatic Observations in Research study having a median age of 53. As to gender, acute COVID diagnoses are about the same male/female but severe cases measured as admittance to ICUs or deaths are overwhelmingly male. Yet, the University College “long-haulers” are about 80% female; the Pragmatic study 72%. The aforementioned advocacy group study found only 17% to be male.