4 ms·

This was Dr David Sinclair, trying to convince us - again - that he found the fountain of youth, much like he did back in in 2004 with resveratrol, cashing 720m

by fasteo 8y ago

This was Dr David Sinclair, trying to convince us - again - that he found the fountain of youth, much like he did back in in 2004 with resveratrol, cashing 720m USD after selling his company to Glaxo in 2008. He was later involved [1] in a case of research fraud involving resveratrol. Snake oil I would say. [1] http://retractionwatch.com/2012/01/12/so-how-peripheral-was-dipak-das-resveratrol-work-really/ http://retractionwatch.com/2012/01/12/so-how-peripheral-was-...

nostromo 8y ago
Unless I'm missing something, you're claiming that David Sinclair's research at Harvard can never be trusted because someone he doesn't seem to know and hasn't worked with (Dipak Das at University of Connecticut) and also happens to be dead committed scientific fraud. This is beyond "guilt by association" it's "guilt by non-association."
- fasteo 8y ago
  What I am trying to say is that you just can’t take basic research and take it to the market, selling it as the fountain of youth. And Dr. Sinclair cited Dipak Das in his research and knew him personally, when they both served together on the scientific committee of the “first international scientific conference of Resveratrol and Health” in Denmark in 2010
  - joe_the_user 8y ago
    What I am trying to say is that you just can’t take basic research and take it to the market, selling it as the fountain of youth. Well, I would speculate that it would require a multiphase treatment to anything like youth restoral. At the same time, I think ultimately we simply don't know. Human evolution didn't necessarily select for or against humans living indefinitely and there may fairly simple mechanism whose interruption could add X many years to human span - or there might not be. Well, on the one-hand, the article goes on to show Sinclair did know Das, on the other hand, the article doesn't show any close connection. Moreover, the article asks "How peripheral was Das' research?" and apparently answer "well, I guess it was kind of peripheral". The Lowe links go to spam so it's hard to figure out some of the implications too.

by fasteo 8y ago

nostromo 8y ago

Unless I'm missing something, you're claiming that David Sinclair's research at Harvard can never be trusted because someone he doesn't seem to know and hasn't worked with (Dipak Das at University of Connecticut) and also happens to be dead committed scientific fraud. This is beyond "guilt by association" it's "guilt by non-association."

fasteo 8y ago
What I am trying to say is that you just can’t take basic research and take it to the market, selling it as the fountain of youth. And Dr. Sinclair cited Dipak Das in his research and knew him personally, when they both served together on the scientific committee of the “first international scientific conference of Resveratrol and Health” in Denmark in 2010
- joe_the_user 8y ago
  What I am trying to say is that you just can’t take basic research and take it to the market, selling it as the fountain of youth. Well, I would speculate that it would require a multiphase treatment to anything like youth restoral. At the same time, I think ultimately we simply don't know. Human evolution didn't necessarily select for or against humans living indefinitely and there may fairly simple mechanism whose interruption could add X many years to human span - or there might not be. Well, on the one-hand, the article goes on to show Sinclair did know Das, on the other hand, the article doesn't show any close connection. Moreover, the article asks "How peripheral was Das' research?" and apparently answer "well, I guess it was kind of peripheral". The Lowe links go to spam so it's hard to figure out some of the implications too.