Er… right. Like there always is for any vaccine. Like, the 30,000-person randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 3 trial for the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2113017
… and the 44 thousand-person Phase 3 trial for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345
… and the similar trials for the J&J and Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine — or just recently the new GSK and Pfizer RSV vaccines:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2209604
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2213836
Even the polio and smallpox vaccines had trials. The days of Edward Jenner and the milkmaids are long past, thankfully.
4 Likes
AnUser
#143
I am pretty sure I have mentioned that to Bicep before so I don’t know how well the second time will work.
It is interesting if people know they are making false claims.
1 Like
I have only watched the first couple of minutes, but Matt has now released an episode of his Optispan podcast on the failed dog trial and ensuing hype that led to his recent, very public rebuke:
4 Likes
No: he’s upset because Dr. Sinclair uses the term “reversal”, when in reality the protocol promotes nothing — other than supplement sales.
6 Likes
ng0rge
#146
Awwwww, AnUser, come on…
Here, maybe a few Kansel quotes will cheer you up…make you feel more centered and normal.
“well if rapa increases bad cholesterol, as some are saying why would anyone do rapa. There has been so many substances that supposedly increased life span in mice and fruit flies etc… but none have been proven to be effective in humans, at least up to now. Rapa i thing is the same, just a fad like resveratrol etc…”
“Just my two cents…There is a rich tech dude (forgot his name) that is spending $2M a year in longevity stuff but he has turned himself in walking/talking zombie. If I looked and sounded like him (post his regimens, because before he used to be healthy looking dude) I doubt I’d want to extend my life. LOL”
“Comparing supplements to cancer is not apples to apples.”
“eat three meals per day and then snack between meals holly shit whoever came up with this should be hung on town square, you should always make sure you get protein, healthy fats, and carbs each day, holly crap this guy should at least get life in jail without a chance of parole, and then the one that said the most important meal of the day is breakfast should be castrated, his balls should be pickled, he should be hung upside down from the ceiling and fed his pickled balls for the rest of his life hahaa). I’m sure I’ve made my point, if not then you might force me to go into my favorite subject/rant- the so-called “scientists” LOL”
3 Likes
I agree that that’s a general problem, but it doesn’t apply in this case. There was simply no effect of the supplement demonstrated, period.
Statins can use up CoQ10 and vitamin K2 but ultimately they have a net benefit for longevity and you can always supplement. The same logic applies to rapamycin as you can always take a statin to compensate for cholesterol increases.
1 Like
Guessing Harvard will oust him soon. Just too much controversy surrounding this guy.
2 Likes
AnUser
#151
Daily Mail is not a reliable source, like the following statement is false:
Dr David Sinclair, professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School, has been hit with allegations of pushing bogus antiaging drugs over the last decade - including one he was paid $720million to develop by pharma giant GlaxoSmithKline.
Technically it isn’t false since there are allegations that are.
This has now hit the Wall Street Journal:
https://www.wsj.com/health/wellness/david-sinclair-longevity-aging-criticism-645fddc5?st=p76jqlax4wdekdl
One new thing:
Dr. Nir Barzilai, the new president of the Academy for Health and Lifespan Research … said Sinclair’s comment about the dog research and his commercial interest in Animal Biosciences crossed a line. “The data is not good, you’re calling it the wrong thing, and then you’re selling it,” he said. “The selling is a step too far.”
5 Likes
Yes - we had a separate discussion on the recent WSJ article. See here: Star Scientist’s Claim of ‘Reverse Aging’ Draws Hail of Criticism (WSJ)
5 Likes
adriank
#154
Kinda sad he is a snake oil salesman.
from 24th August 2024
3 Likes
Wow, even the WSJ is getting in on the debunking of David Sinclair’s commercial efforts. I hope he veers more towards reality-based longevity efforts and statements in the future.
Full Article available for reading here: A ‘Reverse Aging’ Guru’s Trail of Failed Businesses (WSJ)
Harvard longevity guru David Sinclair aims to develop treatments for aging, but his companies have struggled to deliver.
8 Likes
Beth
#156
Wow, that was quite the article.
So, for me, as a lay person, I first blindly followed him because he has the cache of being at Harvard. I thought, well, he must be legit. I have since learned and so have many.
My question to you ‘in the know’ types, aside from being a snake oil salesman, is he also doing excellent work at Harvard (because two things can be true) and that is why they don’t fire him?
I would think he hurts their reputation, but at the same time, schools are shallow and if he is a celeb scientist, they might not care if they respect him. Or, maybe he’s also adding serious value?
4 Likes
AnUser
#157
Has any longevity company delivered? 
2 Likes
I think the two are largely separate… most of the researchers like Matt Kaeberlein and others have good things to say about his lab’s work, its just his commercial ventures where he seems to be too motivated by profit that he veers into things that are less supported by science.
5 Likes
Obviously not yet, but there is a difference between honest efforts with accurate communications, and honest efforts with poor or misleading communications (to the public and investors). Also - I think there is a higher bar (standard) for leading academic researchers…
4 Likes
AnUser
#160
David Sinclair doesn’t seem to have training in philosophy of science or medicine, just hardcore biology of aging. His lack of generalization might’ve made him great in his field but at the same time sloppy with communication.
These media reports might also incentivize Big Pharma companies from not taking risky bets.
WSJ also discussed similar things in April: https://archive.is/fAIMa
I see no benefit to the longevity field personally to hate on Sinclair. I don’t get it. I don’t buy it that he ‘tricked’ investors, either. He made a loooot of people interested in longevity.
1 Like
He has perhaps made an equal number of people disillusioned with longevity too. I checked out of the field for a decade after the Sirtris failure because it became obvious there was nothing very actionable in the field. The hype completely overshadowed any real progress.
4 Likes
