5 ms·

Dr. David Sinclair (who led this study) has a fascinating book about this topic. He discusses this result and many others from his team, and the theory of epige

by jchook 4y ago

Dr. David Sinclair (who led this study) has a fascinating book about this topic. He discusses this result and many others from his team, and the theory of epigenetics. Lifespan (2019) by David Sinclair. Also he narrates the audiobook, and he has a very suave and calming voice.

greatpostman 4y ago
This guy has been shown to be borderline fraudulent and motivated by money
- subharmonicon 4y ago
  Not disputing this, but my observation is that if that’s true he is hardly alone amongst people working in this space. I’ve seen multiple people over the last 15 years say that we’re 3-5 years out from a breakthrough that will result in 120-200 year lifespans. Yet those breakthroughs have yet to materialize. Of course that alone doesn’t mean they are trying to scam people or are perpetrating a fraud, but there seems to be a lot of hype with little to show.
- jchook 4y ago
  Can you give an example? He pushes some theoretical "cell repair" supplements like NMN and resveratrol, but he is repetitively clear they're experimental, and that his evidence is anecdotal. I understand he is invested in them, but I don't jump to "fraud" because of that. His team had other groundbreaking results, such as partially restoring damaged optical nerves in mice by injecting a virus in the eye[1]. 1. https://www.science.org/content/article/researchers-restore-lost-sight-mice-offering-clues-reversing-aging https://www.science.org/content/article/researchers-restore-...
  - ramraj07 4y ago
    Someone can be fraudulent in some aspects while still being legitimate in others. Many many well published professors are full of crap in sub-topics within their own field due to egotistical and financial reasons. This guy has a conflict of interest and just because he’s proud of it doesn’t mean we should ignore it.
    - utopcell 4y ago
      The burden of proof lies with the accuser(s). The argument cannot be that he's fraudulent because he could be fraudulent. What has this particular scientist done ?
      - coldtea 4y ago
        >The burden of proof lies with the accuser(s) Used to be that the burden was laid on scientists not to be merchants...
  - robswc 4y ago
    I'm not saying this is the case here. This Doctor could be a total grifter... but all the same. I've noticed a trend where a person can get _one_ thing wrong and be written off as a "liar" or a "fraud" for the rest of their life. It's annoying.
  - nikkwong 4y ago
    There's a lot of evidence that he popularized NMN and helped build market demand for it only to later use some regulatory trickery to ensure that a company he's involved with is the only one who's licensed to sell it in the US. This behavior is hostile towards consumers and would only financially benefit him and related parties. It's been frowned upon in NMN circles. It puts a bad taste in my mouth given the fact that Sinclair tries to brand himself as someone who puts the interests of humanity over his own. In the video below Dr. Brad Stanfield discusses the controversy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GugcLJ9xvE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GugcLJ9xvE
    - idopmstuff 4y ago
      A quick Amazon search shows a lot of companies selling NMN: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=nmn&crid=12YPXDF097WZV&sprefix=nmn%2Caps%2C155&ref=nb_sb_noss_1 https://www.amazon.com/s?k=nmn&crid=12YPXDF097WZV&sprefix=nm...
      - todotask 4y ago
        Some NMN are fake or shown to have lack of NMN, as far as MAAC10, ProHealth, DoNotAge and probably others provides more than the amount as advertised is genuine.
        idopmstuff 4y ago
        Sure, but the claim was that there's only one company licensed to sell NMN. If that were true, there wouldn't be a dozen companies selling NMN or something they claim to be NMN, regardless of purity/content.
- BurningFrog 4y ago
  It's safe to assume everyone is motivated by money.
  - worik 4y ago
    No it is not. Safe.
- kerpotgh 4y ago
  [dead]
utopcell 4y ago
That book is indeed fascinating. It also has a title warning about the risks to the species of a globally spread virus, right before COVID-19 .
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jchook 4y ago
  And he correctly predicted that Australia would handle it better than the US.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

by jchook 4y ago

greatpostman 4y ago

This guy has been shown to be borderline fraudulent and motivated by money

subharmonicon 4y ago
Not disputing this, but my observation is that if that’s true he is hardly alone amongst people working in this space. I’ve seen multiple people over the last 15 years say that we’re 3-5 years out from a breakthrough that will result in 120-200 year lifespans. Yet those breakthroughs have yet to materialize. Of course that alone doesn’t mean they are trying to scam people or are perpetrating a fraud, but there seems to be a lot of hype with little to show.
jchook 4y ago
Can you give an example? He pushes some theoretical "cell repair" supplements like NMN and resveratrol, but he is repetitively clear they're experimental, and that his evidence is anecdotal. I understand he is invested in them, but I don't jump to "fraud" because of that. His team had other groundbreaking results, such as partially restoring damaged optical nerves in mice by injecting a virus in the eye[1]. 1. https://www.science.org/content/article/researchers-restore-lost-sight-mice-offering-clues-reversing-aging https://www.science.org/content/article/researchers-restore-...
- ramraj07 4y ago
  Someone can be fraudulent in some aspects while still being legitimate in others. Many many well published professors are full of crap in sub-topics within their own field due to egotistical and financial reasons. This guy has a conflict of interest and just because he’s proud of it doesn’t mean we should ignore it.
  - utopcell 4y ago
    The burden of proof lies with the accuser(s). The argument cannot be that he's fraudulent because he could be fraudulent. What has this particular scientist done ?
    - coldtea 4y ago
      >The burden of proof lies with the accuser(s) Used to be that the burden was laid on scientists not to be merchants...
- robswc 4y ago
  I'm not saying this is the case here. This Doctor could be a total grifter... but all the same. I've noticed a trend where a person can get _one_ thing wrong and be written off as a "liar" or a "fraud" for the rest of their life. It's annoying.
- nikkwong 4y ago
  There's a lot of evidence that he popularized NMN and helped build market demand for it only to later use some regulatory trickery to ensure that a company he's involved with is the only one who's licensed to sell it in the US. This behavior is hostile towards consumers and would only financially benefit him and related parties. It's been frowned upon in NMN circles. It puts a bad taste in my mouth given the fact that Sinclair tries to brand himself as someone who puts the interests of humanity over his own. In the video below Dr. Brad Stanfield discusses the controversy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GugcLJ9xvE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GugcLJ9xvE
  - idopmstuff 4y ago
    A quick Amazon search shows a lot of companies selling NMN: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=nmn&crid=12YPXDF097WZV&sprefix=nmn%2Caps%2C155&ref=nb_sb_noss_1 https://www.amazon.com/s?k=nmn&crid=12YPXDF097WZV&sprefix=nm...
    - todotask 4y ago
      Some NMN are fake or shown to have lack of NMN, as far as MAAC10, ProHealth, DoNotAge and probably others provides more than the amount as advertised is genuine.
      - idopmstuff 4y ago
        Sure, but the claim was that there's only one company licensed to sell NMN. If that were true, there wouldn't be a dozen companies selling NMN or something they claim to be NMN, regardless of purity/content.
BurningFrog 4y ago
It's safe to assume everyone is motivated by money.
- worik 4y ago
  No it is not. Safe.
kerpotgh 4y ago
[dead]

utopcell 4y ago

That book is indeed fascinating. It also has a title warning about the risks to the species of a globally spread virus, right before COVID-19 .

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jchook 4y ago
And he correctly predicted that Australia would handle it better than the US.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]