TCM in its AMPK activators and Omega 3 oils has some science behind it.
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.
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
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
Or whether one pursues truth or money as the highest value. Matt and Sinclair made different choices. Sinclair has a pattern of behaviour that makes anything he says, next to meaningless.
1 Like
We have to keep in mind that it’s a changing world out there. Our sense of community and working for the common good is losing out to individualism and getting what you can to protect yourself and your family. Globally we’re feeling threatened and insecure. David Sinclair is by no means an isolated example of this type of behavior. And the media often plays this up with exaggerated displays of rollicking excess - “The Wolf of Wall Street” - sure, it was wrong, but damn, it looked like fun! In the bigger scheme of social ethics, it seems more and more acceptable to just give up and take the money.
1 Like
True, I can’t read minds, and I edited my original statement. Still, Sinclair is smart enough to know that what he’s claiming is false based on the data (that the dog supplement “reversed aging”) and that he is heavily biased because his brother runs the company that sells the supplement. He’s a trained professional scientist, for godssake! I guess he could be delusional, but is that any better?
Why so many here continue to make excuses for him is beyond me. Must be his charisma.
4 Likes
They say now ".… that it is possible to reverse age-related decline in dogs. ", and not reverse aging in itself. I don’t think consumers are stupid either way, which seems to be a common attitude.
1 Like
You’re joking, right?!?!?
3 Likes
No, I am not joking…
For me, I think it’s fairly obvious that average consumers are stupid and easily manipulated by advertising/promotion/fake science. But since I’m also a consumer, my reaction is also…“Hey, that’s not funny!”
Beyond that…For me this whole kerfuffle is a bit of a tempest in a teapot (I’m not a dog owner). I think from Matt Kaeberlein down, anybody with any intelligence can see that this is just about selling a product and not about science (science is just a veneer). And it’s about dogs, not humans. If you want to get to something really important let’s talk about the influence of money on the human longevity movement/industry. Now we’re talking about billions. I just found and read this article, which everyone interested in this should read. Again David Sinclair is poster boy numero uno and it’s an interview with Charles Brenner, one of his main detractors, but the points are just as salient. When the amount of money gets way up in the billions, it has the ability to corrupt anything.
https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/hy4bzl2y3
3 Likes
Having a PhD is not prophylactic against greed or self-promotion. It seems pretty clear that Sinclair’s primary commitment is to his own notoriety and wealth— not to either truth or rigor. That’s been obvious for years. I stopped following him on every platform a few years back when he continued to promote MSM and other of the tech bro’s favorite biohacking snake oil—all of which had (and have) no corroboration (or even significant research) behind them.
6 Likes
Good article…thanks!
1 Like
I knew Brenner and Sinclair had a disagreement, but did not realize Brenner was in such a great position to know the truth. Great article.
1 Like
Brenner is the kind of guy that has an anime body pillow of Sinclair.
4 Likes
All the tsun, none the dere.
1 Like
I found what it means but I’m having to guess at the reference…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsundere
1 Like
Bravo Kaeberlein! I respect someone standing up for what they believe in. I was new to longevity and obsessed with Sinclair…until he made a joint insta post with the woman he was obviously sleeping that they proudly signed up with a talent agency. I don’t mind people cashing in, but that was just gross, and he lost all credibility that he was letting his romance guide his science.
4 Likes
Brand new video detailing Sinclair’s behavior over the years. Seems to me that so many people have been conned/suckered by him because of his skills as a smooth talker with an exotic accent.
5 Likes
I just don’t see the point. Feels like chasing ghosts.
It would take way too much energy and effort to get to the bottom of this. And then you should ask yourself, why would you?
“focus on the science, not the people”
2 Likes