Harvard’s David Sinclair Predicts Age-Reversing Pill by 2035

#1

A leading thinker in the field of aging research, Dr. David Sinclair, shares insights on the rapid pace of advancements in aging research and predicts the availability of age-reversing pills within the next 10 years.

According to Dr. Sinclair, a gene therapy based on partial cellular reprogramming, which still has not become widely available for humans, could cost around $2 million. In contrast to the high cost of the gene therapy method, Dr. Sinclair said that when pills become available, which will mimic the effects of the gene therapy and induce Yamanaka factor gene expression, they will cost a mere $100 for a month’s supply. This means huge savings in gaining access to tissue-rejuvenating technology in pill form.

As for tissue-rejuvenating pills, preclinical research has shown that four weeks of treatment with the molecules these pills would contain made mice physically and behaviorally younger. Moreover, the cocktail of molecules significantly lowered the mice’s biological age (an age assessment based on how well organs and tissues function). If these findings apply to humans, which will require human trials to measure, it may only be a matter of time before people start reaping the rejuvenating benefits of these molecules in pill form.

2 Likes
#2

By 2035 we might be assembling Von Neumann probes and traveling into space, AI improvement is insane and a hyperexponential…

Having a o4-mini level model on your computer running today makes you see things… that people wouldn’t believe, attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion…

OpenAI has a more powerful model than GPT-5 in-house and they’re training a new one. By GPT-8 Sam Altman expects they’d be able to ask it how to cure a certain disease, it’d ask for certain experiments to be run for a few months and the data returned back to it, and then it would go to mouse and ultimately human trials.

7 Likes
#3

Someone fell for the Hypeman meme.

4 Likes
#4

image
image1266×500 42.1 KB

Green shaded line is exponential, with longer time-horizon they can do self-improvement which could lead to a intelligence explosion. I’m not expecting this to happen at these specific dates, but it could, why I said might. :wink:

5 Likes
#5

Sinclair belongs in the quack bin.

  1. It most definitely won’t be few pills.
  2. We can currently slow down aging of the organism via multiple interventions.
  3. The futurists predict that by 2030 we will shift the equation and some aging reversal will be possible.
  4. This will be a difficult multi-approach process.
9 Likes
#6

This is perfectly in line with what I expect from Sinclair at this point. Some might see it as extreme optimist, others as delusion or fraud.

2 Likes
#7

I believe in Sinclair—NMN fuel, resveratrol yogurt, Saturday lifts, high‑protein days. He’ll make us immortal.

"Give me two years supply of NMN for 14 hour days, a lab, and GPT-8, and I’ll make the world immortal " Davd Sinclari c. 2028 CE.

image
image1035×543 65.5 KB

Unironically I like the guy. Way better than his rival Brenner, though ying is not without yang.

3 Likes
#8

By year xyz w’ll be able to blah, blah, blah. Stuff like that would excite me, when I was a teenager. I would eagerly devour magazines like Omni, Future and the like. The magazines are defunct, I’ve grown up and I’ve long since become wise to clickbait content mill stuff that sells magazines, eyeballs and attention since the dawn of printing.

These pie in the sky predictions never come true or if they do, they do so on their own schedule and looking rather different and in a different context.

So when I see some bloke, I really don’t care who, spout off some future predicting nonsense, I skip right over it, as the only thing it does is waste your time.

David Sinclair is trying to stay relevant and visible to better hoodwink his audience with the next scam. Bye, Felicia!

Alert me when you’re holding that thing in your hand, that I can have access to NOW, not in 10 years, 10 days, or “tomorrow” - NOW. Otherwise don’t waste my time.

9 Likes
#9

This is all predicated on the information theory of aging being right. SOX2 (one of the yamanka factors) is a nuclear factor that encourages autophagy in part by reducing the expression of mTOR. Alternatively mTOR could be inhibited …

2 Likes
#10

If Sinclair is promoting it, I’m already calling BS. Brilliant guy, but a bad track record of over-hype.

7 Likes
#11

As soon as a scientist attaches a paycheck to something he’s touting (Resveratrol, NMN in Sinclairs case) their credibility goes out the window for me.

2 Likes
#12

I was going to throw up his interview on moonshots where he shoots down rapamycin because of its immune suppression effects for comment.

His assurance that its just around the corner seems to lack any hard evidence.

But i am interested to know if there is any evidence on longer term immune suppression flow on effects just to at least understand his argument.

Anyone know?

1 Like
#13

I posted my WBC numbers. The effect on neutrophils is short term

1 Like
#14

Sinclair is a f#cktard. Just ignore him.

5 Likes
#15

This is disappointing, considering that Sinclair’s chief benefit to society is generating wrong ideas as fast as humanly possible.

4 Likes
#16

I am not a fan of Sinclair, and take little stock in what he says. … not trustworthy. He has made million$ selling snake oil.

4 Likes
#17

“One of the important things to remember this is not how long it is operating autonomously, this is the human equivalent task work. So when GPT-5 pro or GPT-5 does something that would take a human 2 hours, it usually does it in a couple of minutes.”

#18

Sinclair has brought a lot of interest to the longevity field. This is needed if we are to advance.

However, some of his recommendations are epic fails - like Resveratrol.

8 Likes
#19

Sinclair made mistakes, yes, but he’s clearly changed, and that shouldn’t overshadow the good things he’s done. Everyone makes mistakes.

4 Likes
#20

That $720 million has been oft-repeated, it leaves the impression that all of it went to Sinclair. Below is the link to the Tender Offer registered at the Securities and Exchange Commission, and some quotes from the website. The website’s table contains the names of all shareholders paid. Although it is publicly available, I truncated the table and left only the row containing shares of Sinclair.

https://br.advfn.com/noticias/EDGAR/2008/artigo/26115274

Tender Offer.

This Schedule 14D-9 relates to the tender offer by Fountain Acquisition Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Purchaser”) and a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of SmithKline Beecham Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation (“Parent”) and an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of GlaxoSmithKline plc, a public limited company organized under the laws of England and Wales (“GSK”), to purchase all of the outstanding Shares at a purchase price of $22.50 per Share, net to the selling stockholders in cash (the “Offer Price”), without interest thereon and less any required withholding taxes upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Offer to Purchase, dated May 2, 2008 (the “Offer to Purchase”), and in the related Letter of Transmittal (which, together with the Offer to Purchase and any amendments or supplements to either of them, constitutes the “Offer”). The Offer is described in a Tender Offer Statement on Schedule TO (as amended or supplemented from time to time, the “Schedule TO”), filed by GSK and Purchaser with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on May 2, 2008. The Offer to Purchase and related Letter of Transmittal have been filed as Exhibits (a)(2) and (a)(3) hereto, respectively.

The table below sets forth the amounts payable upon consummation of the Offer to the Company’s non-employee directors pursuant to the cash out of such Directors’ Options and Restricted Stock and purchase of such Directors’ Shares.

Non-Employee Directors Options Options Stock(2) Shares(3) Total

David Sinclair, Ph.D. $ 2,727,480 $ 2,195,078 $ 704,824 $ 2,733,930 $ 8,361,312

So Sinclair made $8M, not $720 M. The stock was trading at $12.50, but the offer was for $22.50. So there was a profit of about half to Sinclair and company, or about $4 M to Sinclair, for the “overprice”.

The price at IPO (initial public offering) was $10.00.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1388775/000104746907004542/a2178109z424b4.htm.

4 Likes