4 ms·

After a quick search, much of the TA-65 commentary seems to be well-placed SEO-optimised junk. Some of it seems like it could be 'affiliate program' stuff too.

After a quick search, much of the TA-65 commentary seems to be well-placed SEO-optimised junk. Some of it seems like it could be 'affiliate program' stuff too. If you can add to the debate sensibly, consider contributing here or upvoting: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8967/does-a-molecule-called-ta-65-reverse-aging-in-humans http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8967/does-a-mole... While trying (perhaps unsuccessfully) to avoid an ad-hominum attack, here's some other info on the author: Positive, perhaps: https://lifeboat.com/ex/bios.joshua.mitteldorf https://lifeboat.com/ex/bios.joshua.mitteldorf Negative, perhaps: http://www.scientistsfor911truth.org/mempages/Mitteldorf.html http://www.scientistsfor911truth.org/mempages/Mitteldorf.htm...

reasonattlm 11y ago
TA-65 is indeed a bunch of herbal junk, sold by the usual suspects. Mitteldorf on the other hand is a legitimate theorist with a programmed aging viewpoint, e.g. that the best approach to aging is to find differences in levels of gene products and push those levels back to being closer to what they were in youth - to revert the program. You can probably see why he's interested in anything that might provide a step towards studies that could add supporting evidence, even if not effective to a practical level. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mitteldorf%20J%5BAuthor%5D http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mitteldorf%20J%5BAu... Not a view I agree with, as I see the balance of evidence supporting the more mainstream view of aging as a consequence of accumulated damage, with these changes in gene product levels being a response to that damage. Aging research is certainly a field with a lot of varied opinions on what exactly is going on under the hood. Still, programmed aging is a minority camp at this time, albeit a very vocal one.
- oskarpearson 11y ago
  Thanks for taking the time to reply. I'll look into him more. Also: the first time you hit the above link above, the site gives a 'no history' error and doesn't return any results - which is unintentionally funny, I guess. :) Searching does return some results though!

reasonattlm 11y ago

TA-65 is indeed a bunch of herbal junk, sold by the usual suspects. Mitteldorf on the other hand is a legitimate theorist with a programmed aging viewpoint, e.g. that the best approach to aging is to find differences in levels of gene products and push those levels back to being closer to what they were in youth - to revert the program. You can probably see why he's interested in anything that might provide a step towards studies that could add supporting evidence, even if not effective to a practical level. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mitteldorf%20J%5BAuthor%5D http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mitteldorf%20J%5BAu... Not a view I agree with, as I see the balance of evidence supporting the more mainstream view of aging as a consequence of accumulated damage, with these changes in gene product levels being a response to that damage. Aging research is certainly a field with a lot of varied opinions on what exactly is going on under the hood. Still, programmed aging is a minority camp at this time, albeit a very vocal one.

oskarpearson 11y ago
Thanks for taking the time to reply. I'll look into him more. Also: the first time you hit the above link above, the site gives a 'no history' error and doesn't return any results - which is unintentionally funny, I guess. :) Searching does return some results though!