Mark_Sisson

Ray was looksmaxxing since 1984, 10 weeks of 50-100mg pregnenalone daily made some huge difference.

Adidas said the record breaking marathon shoe would be available for $500 on its app at 10am. Wasn’t even available for 2 minutes.

Normal people eating 150-200 grams of protein daily will go down as as big of a disaster as the lead pipes that took down the Roman Empire.

Megyn Kelly just killed the gym myth: “Sprinting beats squats, lunges, and everything else for a tight, round, powerful ass.” Mark Sisson agreed 100%. Olympic sprinters show the proof: strong, lifted glutes that turn heads. Marathon runners? Flat and tiny. The smart minimum-effective stack: walk daily, lift twice a week (one leg day), sprint once as your finisher, and nail your diet. Hits 85-90% of your genetic potential — no endless grinding required. Way more fun than another set of squats. Adding sprints for that sprinting booty, or still loyal to the squat rack?

If you put your kid in this “training” at 7yo it is nothing more than a fancy daycare At 7-14yo your kid doesn’t need training or to specialize in a sport. They need to be a kid. Play multiple sports. Play pickup sports with their friends outside. Not every waking moment needs to be scheduled for kids. If you disagree with me then go listen to all the pro athletes who say the same thing

Metformin. Rapamycin. Both “longevity drugs” hyped by “longevity influencers.” And now evidence that both interfere w/ adaptations to exercise. No free lunch in biology.

Your ancestors weren’t slamming 100g of saturat fat everyday from animal products If you leave fresh, "raw" milk alone, the cream (fat) naturally floats to the top because it is less dense than the rest of the liquid.  Historically, people would simply wait for this to happen and literally "skim" the cream off the top with a spoon. This is where the term skim milkcomes from This entire “whole dairy fat maxxing bullshit is exactly that. Bullshit. You can and should consume a reasonable amount of both And if you’re already consuming some whole fat dairy for fat soluble vitamins, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with adding in some low fat dairy to hit macros as part of a well balanced diet Tired of this “naturalist” cope Richard Wrangham’s hypothesis posits that cooking (literally food modification) was actually one of the key factors in the rapid development of the human brain compared to other animal species. You change the “whole food” metrx Why? Cooked food is easier to digest. I have a hypothesis myself: if many of the problems created by modernity didn’t exist (since humans have had a lot of really bad as well as great ideas), could medical and technological advancements (particularly when considered within a larger ecological context that also respects our biologically adapted necessities) facilitate levels of health otherwise unattainable? Humanity’s desire to manipulate our external environment for our own betterment and well-being would seem to suggest so. We just need to learn from our successes and failures more effectively. Naturalism erodes gradually, just like a heap of grains. There’s no single step where we can say, “Now we’re unnatural.” Every innovation is one more ambiguous step along the continuum. This is why debates about “natural” vs. “unnatural” are so slippery and subjective; it’s a moving target, with no objective boundary. Context matters. The idea that we can simply identify, extract, and provide every beneficial compound in food as a supplement is considered scientifically naive as well. there are countless unknown compounds. thousands of phytonutrients in plants and zoonutrients in animal products we have nowhere near understanding how they all function or interact within the human body. If a compound’s existence or role is unknown, it cannot be supplemented, leaving very real potential nutritional gaps. A balanced diet acts is the best insurance policy against our own scientific ignorance, because it offers a complex web of compounds, essential or not, that have co-evolved with human biology over millions of years. Secondly, nutrients do not act in isolation but within the context of the food matrix in many instance. This doesn’t make supplement isolated compounds bad. But supplement isolated compounds (and seeing good clinical outcomss) also doesn’t mean that many nutrients (especially fat-soluble vitamins like A, D, E, and K in foods) aren’t naturally packaged with the precise lipids required for their optimal absorption and utilization, a synergy that hasn’t yet been recapiliated for every nutrient someone would theoretically need to supplement with But it is a tremendous category error to move from “eating whole foods is good and has certain benefits that supplements can’t capture in some contexts” to “isolating stuff bad bro” It’s not an "either/or" situation; it’s a "yes, and"situation. Moving from "context matters" to "isolation is inherently flawed" ignores basically all of modern pharmacology and targeted nutrition.