Peter Attia

succumbing to an eight-year-old's gambit, which is tougher.

No, but maybe I will just remind people or for folks who are new to the program, what these categories mean.

So you mentioned five and we're starting from the most promising or the closest to quote unquote truth, which we're calling proven.

Although I put proven in quotes because technically nothing in biology is proven, right?

It's not like mathematics where you prove something and write QED at the end and never have to think about it again.

So proven would be as close to well-established claim as you're going to find.

The implication for us, of course, is you've got lots of high quality consistent data.

The category beneath that would be promising.

This is a category where the claims look good.

There are data to support it, but maybe we're still waiting on replication or maybe most of the data are moving in one direction, but not all of it or something like that.

Category beneath that we call fuzzy.

And this means there are some data around the claim, but they are really inconsistent and incomplete.

So overall, you would say the data quality here is not that great, but there's probably a signal.

Beneath that, we have noise.

So here we have something where there are just frankly no real meaningful results.

So noise is something that it's not that I'm saying you shouldn't pay attention to it, but you clearly don't want to be distracted by it.

And it's best to wait and see if noise declares itself by going up to fuzzy or

with the presence of some data as it works its way up the chain or whether data actually emerge that put it in the final category, which is actual nonsense.

So again, nonsense means we actually have data and the data refute the claim being made

So as far as we can tell, this is as close to disproven as you'll be.