4 ms·
This feels like a headline that arrives in my parents' spam folder every two weeks or so for the past two decades.
by pavel_lishin 1y ago
This feels like a headline that arrives in my parents' spam folder every two weeks or so for the past two decades.
- stevenjgarner 1y agoI feel you. The fact that it cleared Nature’s editorial bar suggests it’s more than a marginal observation. At minimum, the work would have needed rigorous experimental controls, reproducibility across multiple assays, and clear mechanistic insight. “Notability” is high, but skepticism is warranted given the mouse result.
- ac29 1y ago> The fact that it cleared Nature’s editorial bar This was published in Nature Aging, not Nature. Nature (the company) has 100+ journals, I dont think any of them are as selective as Nature (the journal). That doesn't make this a bad article or a poorly reviewed one, but I wouldnt equate it with an article published in Nature.
- layoric 1y agoIt’s almost like they are cashing in on their good name…
- qualeed 1y agoSpam folder? I feel like I see some strongly-worded headline about anti-aging of some sort here every two weeks.
- clickety_clack 1y agoSorry, this isn’t actually a public forum, we’re all just chatting in your parents spam folder.
- pavel_lishin 1y agoPlausible. I once found a group of people who'd somehow infested a VBulletin forum's plugin, that had (for some reason?) its own built in chat system. Imagine opening up your floorboards, and there's a bunch of rats underneath, chatting about baseball.
- glenstein 1y agoI for one am grateful that there's so much new research on the topic to be talked about.
- qualeed 1y agoThe research is great! The reporting is typically... not as great. At the very least, the headlines are typically extremely over-stated.
- BurningFrog 1y agoMost if them don't age well...