
John Thyfault (TeeFo)
8.2K posts

John Thyfault (TeeFo)
@john_thyfault
Our lab does research on exercise and metabolic health. I am passionate about family, friends, football, camping, music, KU Jayhawks, FHSU Tigers, and science!
















Obesity and overweight are risk factors for several types of cancer. Why? A @JAMA_current review jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…



The weight room is the most influential room in a school. It’s not a place to hang out — it’s a classroom. A place where habits are built, standards are set, and character is developed.

The cuts aren’t random. They’re targeting on-ramps. When we zoom into 2026 funding decline by mechanism, the deepest cuts land on new ideas entering the system: ▪️Small R (R03 / R15) ↓81% ▪️R21 exploratory grants ↓73% ▪️Other high-variance mechanisms ↓70%+ If you want to stall science, this is exactly how. Meanwhile, among other news: ▪️R01s ↓47% ▪️R37 MERIT ↓40% In other words, the earliest-stage bets are being starved first. When the on-ramps close, the damage shows up later: ↓ pilot data ↓ resubmissions that mature into R01s ↓ new labs surviving their early years ↓ shared cores that support entire departments ↓ discoveries that ever reach trials So much remains unanswered. This week we’re digging deeper: -which disease areas rely most on these mechanisms -which institutions are most exposed -where the first downstream breaks appear (trials, screening, imaging, prevention, survivorship) If you run a lab, grants office, or cancer center, tell us what cut you want. Source: NIH RePORTER via @Jori_health



Good summary by @grok The defenders of V02 max primacy don't have the data to support it; a proxy extrapolated from the 99%+ data based on METS, and it isn't even VO2 max (it's V02 peak).




This whole thing is quite odd. One MET = 3.5 ml/kg/min of VO2. In the strictest sense, a MET is a direct measure of VO2 If there is any "conflation" going on, it is in making the assumption that a given level of exercise intensity within a given CRF protocol corresponds with a fixed number of METs/fixed VO2. He is correct that the majority of these studies don't measure VO2, i.e. they run a VO2 protocol but don't have the subjects hooked up to a met-cart - for practical reasons. However, if they were hooked up to a met-cart, the VO2max would line up relatively well with the end workload. And, when VO2max doesn't line up with the end-stage workload on a test, it's only due to differences in economy between the subjects. E.g. someone has a better or worse running gait - hardly a longevity measure. The problem is not that VO2max is not a good measure of cardiorespiratory fitness. The problem is that the number on most people's watches is *not* their actual lab-measured VO2max!

The Super Agers (SA) had twice the number of new neurons (immature) as the healthy older adults (HA)


Finally, the debunking of the VO2 max BS. Note also: indicators of mortality (when low) are not indicators of longevity (when high).