#61

I’ve heard several interviews about this and how the research was rigourously performed after all of the controversy and the results still stood were even heightened, but nobody wanted to hear about it. His reputation had been ruined. Has anyone taken a look at the research done afterward?

1 Like
#62

No labs have been able to consistently get any significant lifespan improvements from resveratrol from what I’ve heard. The ITP was, with David Sinclaire’s input, unable to get any lifespan benefits. If you’ve seen evidence, please share it.

7 Likes
#63

Hi Smh, can you clarify what you mean? Sinclair’s research?, the ITP results? And if it’s about resveratrol, there’s been tons of studies since then. Both positive and negative. And when you say his reputation is ruined, I think that’s a little strong, I would use “damaged”.

1 Like
#64

In the Biotech/Pharma news publication “Stat” today:

Renowned Harvard University geneticist and longevity researcher David Sinclair recently made an astonishing assertion: Scientists had developed the first pill — well, a soft, beef-flavored chew — “proven to reverse aging” in dogs. Which miracle molecules delivered this supposed scientific breakthrough, he didn’t say. But he told his 438,000 followers on X where they could buy it: the website of Animal Bioscience, a veterinary supplement company he founded and which is headed by his brother, Nick Sinclair.

The claim in a company news release, followed by the tweet stating that the supplement was “proven to slow the effects of aging,” has sparked outrage from other scientists online, and the board of an international organization of top longevity researchers — which David Sinclair leads — will discuss the matter at its meeting this week.

Despite his enthusiasm, there is no published scientific research that has yet demonstrated the compounds in Animal Bioscience’s supplements — which have been on the market for more than a year — reverse or even slow aging in dogs.

8 Likes
#65

Jesus, maybe his reputation will be in ruins! I’ll toss him a handful of metformins when I pass him lying in the gutter.
Sure hope that doesn’t happen to Taylor Swift…the bigger they come, the harder they fall.

4 Likes
#66

NMN is the best cure for jetlag I have found. It resets my circadian rhythm completely when I travel. It’s also great for an energy boost to get rid of normal fatigue. I take between 500 mg - 1 g of powder daily mixed in with EVOO. I’m not sure it helps lifespan, but it does help my healthspan and that’s important too.

(I hope it helps lifespan, but I’m doubtful.)

6 Likes
#67

Sad to see rivalry where there should be cooperation. Clearly evidence for nmn is slow in coming but many already see the difference like myself. The jury is clearly out on longterm results. Similarly Rapamycin human trials for longevity are in early days and require a leap of faith. Ive been on nmn for best part of 6 years juggling an autoimmune disease that was, at least periodically, clearly activated by nmn; exacerbating inflammation just like in the recent nature paper on vascular inflammation, but I persisted with breaks and mitigated with anti inflammatories such as liposomal curcumin, omega 3 etc. in addition to prescription drugs. I knew from evidence nad boosting was right even if hard to prove yet. And now for the past 6 months rapamycin perfectly complemented this inflammation issue with NMN. Last 6 months on weekly 6mg rapamycin no trace of inflammation despite 500mg liposomal nmn (except on day of rapamycin) . I could even come off the prescription autoimmune drugs at last having failed with nmn for 6 years…These 2 molecules are like ying and yang :yin_yang: a bit like K &S.
n=1 happy hacker

3 Likes
#68

Kaberlein’s latest statement on twitter:

An amended press release from Animal Biosciences has been posted with a new quote from

@davidasinclair

, now claiming that this is “the first supplement shown to reverse the effects of age related decline in dogs”. To me, this seems even more problematic than the original quote, as it indicates clear, pre-meditated intent. David had the opportunity to rethink his quote and interpret this pre-print honestly, but instead chose the opposite path. Our field should be better than this

@ahlresearch

7 Likes
#69

I’m not a scientist I’m a fellow Australian of Dr S from the way he talks I personally feel he’s a show pony peddling drugs for profit.

I can only make this observation by watching him on YouTube but I feel it in my bones I hope I’m wrong but science meddling with $ doesn’t add up to me!!

12 Likes
#70

Welcome to the forum.
I see Sinclair in the opposite way. He seems genuine, caring, a bit too smart and open minded, which are both good traits in general.

Sinclair reminds me of the people mentioned in this article, “list of geniuses with terrible ideas”, and the mechanism behind it. It is something I expect of the great people. He’s also Hungarian, so he might be one of the martians.

Imagine a black box which, when you pressed a button, would generate a scientific hypothesis. 50% of its hypotheses are false; 50% are true hypotheses as game-changing and elegant as relativity. Even despite the error rate, it’s easy to see this box would quickly surpass space capsules, da Vinci paintings, and printer ink cartridges to become the most valuable object in the world. Scientific progress on demand, and all you have to do is test some stuff to see if it’s true? I don’t want to devalue experimentalists. They do great work. But it’s appropriate that Einstein is more famous than Eddington. If you took away Eddington, someone else would have tested relativity; the bottleneck is in Einsteins. Einstein-in-a-box at the cost of requiring two Eddingtons per insight is a heck of a deal.

What if the box had only a 10% success rate? A 1% success rate? My guess is: still most valuable object in the world. Even an 0.1% success rate seems pretty good, considering (what if we ask the box for cancer cures, then test them all on lab rats and volunteers?) You have to go pretty low before the box stops being great.

I thought about this after reading this list of geniuses with terrible ideas. Linus Pauling thought Vitamin C cured everything. Isaac Newton spent half his time working on weird Bible codes. Nikola Tesla pursued mad energy beams that couldn’t work. Lynn Margulis revolutionized cell biology by discovering mitochondrial endosymbiosis, but was also a 9-11 truther and doubted HIV caused AIDS. Et cetera. Obviously this should happen. Genius often involves coming up with an outrageous idea contrary to conventional wisdom and pursuing it obsessively despite naysayers. But nobody can have a 100% success rate. People who do this successfully sometimes should also fail at it sometimes, just because they’re the kind of person who attempts it at all. Not everyone fails. Einstein seems to have batted a perfect 1000 (unless you count his support for socialism). But failure shouldn’t surprise us. …

2 Likes
#71

@AnUser I love it! You’re so quirky! (in all of it’s permutations)…one of the martians indeed! (always leading me down some fascinating side alley)

#72

Welcome to the forum! I’m a triple citizen, AU, NZ and US. We spent 10 yrs in AU until 2017. Lovely country. I concur on the concerns that commercialization of one’s research and of your popularity corrupts. Some people more than others.

3 Likes
#73

So, the fact that he’s lying about the age reversal dog supplement to help enrich his brother doesn’t dim that halo you’ve been seeing over his head?

(Edit: not a “fact” since I can’t read minds, just my opinion based on the evidence presented so far)

5 Likes
#74

Lynn Margulis might be batting 1000 still.

#75

I’m not an academic but my bullshit radar is alerted as an Australian think he’s been polluted by living in the USA, the money machine attached to a university and believing his the bs written about himself, ego can be a bad thing just saying!!

2 Likes
#76

Hahahahahahaha some levity here what? :smile:

#77

TCM in its AMPK activators and Omega 3 oils has some science behind it.

#78

Lying is a strong word, it means Sinclair knows it is false but says it regardless.
I don’t get that from him at all.

#79

Back when Sinclair did his Lifespan podcast, he was pretty clear he wasn’t in it for the money, no commercial interests (or at least none clouding what he was saying). I thought he did a good job and believed the things stated. Some of them were probably wrong, but he was representing the evidence that he thought was best at that time.
It’s looking like money is corrupting, and yes there is more of it available here than AU. It is however an individual choice as to how one handles opportunities and whether integrity ends up being the top priority, or whether this gets bent when there is money to be made.
Without actually knowing the thought process, perhaps he genuinely believes what he says, and as such no lies, just a change in how objective he is being? That would be giving him benefit of the doubt. Conversely, if he knows there are misrepresentation of science, then there is a deeper problem. I think Dr. K thinks the latter is the case, based on his statement.

3 Likes
#80

Precisely, no one really knows, people are trying to mind-read into Sinclair’s mind which is a fallacy.

I just go by my prior that he has said things with not so much precision, which is what I have expected. The best way to know would be through a conversation or debate.

1 Like