and thanks to a tiny disclaimer in the description the Real Sinclair can’t do much about it as it’s not legally impersonation.
2 Likes
It’s horrible! If it’s not legally impersonation then the existing stupid “legal” rules have to be changed. It’s definitely exploitation of his image. Cannot imagine stress level he has to live with.
3 Likes
It’s actually a nice talk. I’ve been thinking about doing it myself, olive oil fast. I don’t see why they have to steal Sinclair’s image when they could come up with another one to represent whatever LLM they’re using to write the script.
1 Like
#Views… Take Matt Kaeberline on Youtube, it’s a stretch for him to get to 10K views.
1 Like
I’ve watched one or two videos from the “Fake Sinclair” channel. I figured out that it wasn’t really him after probably 10 minutes viewing. But, his image and voice are very well done. Looking at some of the comments I’m surprised that most of them appear to believe it really is David Sinclair. People are gullible!
I must admit I tend to agree with people who think this sort of thing should not be allowed. It is to some extent fraudulent unless it were to have in the actual video “This is not David Sinclair” as a heading.
4 Likes
They use this disclaimer in the description.I asked Google Gemini for an analysis (below)
Disclaimer: This is a fan-made channel, and its content is not affiliated with David Sinclair or his companies. The videos are inspired by David Sinclair’s public statements and ideas for educational and motivational purposes only, using a synthesized voice that does not belong to David Sinclair. We use visual lip-syncing and dubbed narration to match the spoken words with on-screen footage, purely to enhance clarity, create a cinematic experience, and make the content more engaging for viewers.
Our aim is to amplify the original message by making it easier to understand for the end consumer, helping us reach and educate more people with David Sinclair’s valuable perspectives. We also make the messages of David Sinclair more accessible to people who are deaf or hard of hearing by applying professional transcription to the majority of our videos. We share his visionary ideas in a respectful and inspiring manner, without any intent to mislead.
Our channel’s content is based on facts, rumors, and fiction. Nothing on this channel is nutrition or medical advice."
| Element in the Disclaimer | Legal Protection Against | Function of the Element |
|---|---|---|
| 1. “This is a fan-made channel…” | Formal Impersonation / Identity Fraud | Denies the claim that they are the official communication channel of Dr. Sinclair. |
| 2. “…not affiliated with David Sinclair or his companies.” | False Endorsement / Sponsorship | Directly covers them against the claim that Sinclair approves of the content or any product they might be promoting (the core commercial issue). |
| 3. “…using a synthesized voice that does not belong to David Sinclair.” | Deepfake Legislation / Fraud | This is the technical disclosure. It denies the false claim that this is his actual voice, which is a key step to skirting modern deepfake liability laws. |
| 4. “…for educational and motivational purposes only…” | Copyright / Fair Use | This frames the content as ‘transformative’ and ‘educational’. In many legal systems, using copyrighted material for commentary, criticism, or education is permitted under the principle of fair use. |
| 5. “…to enhance clarity, create a cinematic experience…” | Creative Intent | This supports the fair use argument by framing the content as a new creative work and not a simple, unedited copy. |
| 6. “Our channel’s content is based on facts, rumors, and fiction.” | Liability for Factual Errors / Misinformation | This is a very strong blanket defense. The creators explicitly state that parts of the video may be fictional or based on rumors, making it exponentially harder to sue them for spreading factual errors or untruths. |
| 7. “Nothing on this channel is nutrition or medical advice.” | Medical/Health Liability | This is the most essential health-related disclaimer. It protects the creators from claims of damage if viewers follow their protocol (like the “Olive Oil Fast”) and suffer illness or injury. |
Conclusion on Protection
The creators have built a legal cocoon by claiming: “We are fans (1), we are not him (2), this is not his voice (3), this is educational (4), it might be fictional (6), and it is not medical advice (7).”
This strategy makes it extremely expensive and difficult for Dr. David Sinclair to successfully file a lawsuit, as he would have to legally dismantle each of these specific, written defenses.
1 Like
There is, however, a broader public interest in stopping this sort of thing.
I am not a fan of David Sinclair, but this is people making money of using his credibility (which is low with me personally) to make money out of a youtube account.
As the law stands he probably cannot stop it. I personally think he gets a lot of the science wrong, but I would not wish to try to prevent him from making his arguments. However, this is wrong.
6 Likes
They could stop it if they wanted to:
2 Likes
Sinclair on X: “I think it’s criminal that @YouTube allows a money-making channel featuring dozens of fake AI videos of me giving out misleading health advice, even after we’ve filed multiple formal complaints”
https://x.com/davidasinclair/status/2001313375804928433?s=51
2 Likes
It’s gone now.
3 Likes
Sinclair related news.
Below is the link to the study.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s44276-025-00177-8
Dosage is low.
Methods
Ten patients with glioblastoma awaiting surgery were administered 5.6 mg of Resveratrol (R) and **560 ng of Copper (Cu) four times a day for an average of 11.6 ± 5.37 days. Another ten patients who did not receive R-Cu acted as controls. A tissue sample was taken at operation for analysis.
Results
R-Cu treatment led to marked deactivation of cfChPs that were present in the tumour microenvironment, which was accompanied by a highly significant down-regulation in Ki-67, nine hallmarks of cancer, six immune check-points and three stem cell biomarkers as revealed by immuno-fluorescence analysis. Transcriptome sequencing detected marked upregulation of pro-apoptotic and down-regulation of anti-apoptotic genes. Also detected was down-regulation of PVRIG-2P, a homologue of immune checkpoint receptor PVRIG, which is a functional analogue of PD-L1.
Resveratrol has a half life of 1 - 3 hours, so the frequency is reasonable. But copper has a half life of days. So maybe one dose should be enough?
OH Yeah, people ARE gullible. Here in the US it is about 40 to 50% of people will believe lies! The person in charge has proven that beyond a doubt. Years ago there was a study showing these numbers. I can’t find it now.
Found this on my hard drive:
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough,
we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding
out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge,
even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark