I think his approach is much like his patient Bryan Johnson’s approach which fits within the conventional wisdom that guides the core of longevity.
He says on his website it is unclear if gene expression changes are bad. Personally I think the failure to express long genes is at the core of the diseases of aging.
1 Like
EnrQay
#3
There are too many “influencer” red flags about his website: name-branding, the “M.D.” thing, vague promises of therapies that are not ready for prime time, online courses, etc. Does he even have any peer-reviewed publications? My quick search produced nothing.
This skepticism seems reasonable:
I suspect that Zolman is using the Bryan Johnson Blueprint work and heavy PR effort to launch their Longevity Center effort (perhaps for fund raising, or just public awareness of the effort to be followed by the launch of the longevity centers). The entire effort seems much more optimized around PR for their efforts, than the longevity movement as a whole.
I can see pros and cons to this approach. It certainly is raising awareness of the longevity movement and science. And the sharing of the information on what Bryan is using and how well its working is perhaps the most open we’ve ever seen anyone - which is also nice.
There is also of course, the negatives that will cause societal blowback too… rich guys, biohacking their way to eternal life is a trop that gets perpetuated, and the science is less open and shared than I’d like it (probably driven by commercial concerns, which I understand).
3 Likes
I wish they would quote units and cite sources.
I think, however, this forum is an order of magnitude better for solid data and links to reasearch.
There has always been big bucks in functional longevity. I am not, however, persuaded that Bryan Johnson’s results are that exceptional. Michael Lustgarten and i do better on CRP and we are both older than Bryan Johnson.
3 Likes
RPS
#7
Looks like Oliver Zolman has joined up with Adam Bataineh at Numenor.
2 Likes
