Matt Kaeberlein reflects on "David Sinclair’s Longevity Lie"

Matt Kaeberlein reflects on "David Sinclair’s Longevity Lie" Dr Matt Kaeberlein 14.1K subscribers Subscribed 546 Share Thanks Clip Save 13,827 views Sep 5, 2024 The Optispan Podcast with Matt Kaeberlein Subscribe to our channel: / @optispan Check out Scott Carney's channel: / @sgcarney Related episodes: The True Story of David Sinclair's Longevity Lie: • The True Story of David Sinclair's Lo... DON'T Take Resveratrol Until You Watch This Video: • DON'T Take Resveratrol Until You Watc... Scientists Debate How to Live Longer & Longevity Drugs: • Dr. Charles Brenner: How to Live Long... An introduction to the study of RAPAMYCIN: • An introduction to the study of RAPAM... In this episode, Matt and Nick react to investigative journalist and author Scott Carney's video describing what he calls "David Sinclair's longevity lie" in the context of David's longevity-focused entrepreneurial ventures. Matt shares his professional history with David, including his early interactions with David in Leonard Guarente's lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and scientific differences that emerged after Matt and colleagues were unable to reproduce a key result from David's work pertaining to resveratrol. Their discussion touches on some of David's scientific claims about age reversal, the role of institutions such as Harvard University in regulating scientific integrity, the potential for future interventions in healthspan and longevity, and the importance of separating personal feelings from scientific evaluation. David, currently a professor in Harvard Medical School's Department of Genetics at the Paul F. Glenn Center for Biology of Aging Research, is a prominent geroscience researcher whose lab focuses on age-related epigenetic change, cellular reprograming, longevity drug discovery, mitochondrial fitness, reproductive aging, neurodegenerative disease, and the human secretome. He has received awards including the National Institutes of Health Nathan Shock Award, the Merck Prize, and the Australian Medical Research Medal, and was elected to TIME's 2014 “100 Most Influential People in the World" list. David conducted postdoctoral research at MIT and obtained a PhD in Molecular Genetics at the University of New South Wales. 0:00 Introduction 6:12 The video begins 7:21 Claims of immortality 8:26 The consequences of making unsubstantiated claims 10:23 A logical fallacy 15:04 Some clarifications about SIR2 17:23 TED Talks + getting information from credible sources 19:15 Setting the record straight on sirtuins and lifespan 22:19 Reproducible work from David's lab 24:02 GlaxoSmithKline's decision 25:42 Conflating the resveratrol story with sirtuin biology 26:10 A "buddy system" of reviewing papers 30:57 Andrew Huberman and Peter Attia + bashing the scientific enterprise 33:20 Show us the data 37:25 Why hasn't Harvard taken action? 41:41 Not a totally fake space 44:34 Relationship with the FDA 50:04 Matt's resignation from the Academy for Health & Lifespan Research 54:14 Immortality vs tackling the biology of aging 56:13 Closing thoughts 58:55 Looking at the comments Producers: Tara Mei, Nicholas Arapis Video Editor: Jacob Keliikoa DISCLAIMER: The information provided on the Optispan podcast is intended solely for general educational purposes and is not meant to be, nor should it be construed as, personalized medical advice. No doctor-patient relationship is established by your use of this channel. The information and materials presented are for informational purposes only and are not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We strongly advise that you consult with a licensed healthcare professional for all matters concerning your health, especially before undertaking any changes based on content provided by this channel. The hosts and guests on this channel are not liable for any direct, indirect, or other damages or adverse effects that may arise from the application of the information discussed. Medical knowledge is constantly evolving; therefore, the information provided should be verified against current medical standards and practices. More places to find us: Twitter: / optispanpodcast Twitter: / optispan Twitter: / mkaeberlein Linkedin: / optispan https://www.optispan.life/ Hi, I'm Matt Kaeberlein. I spent the first few decades of my career doing scientific research into the biology of aging, trying to understand the finer details of how humans age in order to facilitate translational interventions that promote healthspan and improve quality of life. Now I want to take some of that knowledge out of the lab and into the hands of people who can really use it. On this podcast I talk about all things aging and healthspan, from supplements and nutrition to the latest discoveries in longevity research. My goal is to lift the veil on the geroscience and longevity world and help you apply what we know to your own personal health trajectory. I care about quality science and will always be honest about what I don't know. I hope you'll find these episodes helpful! Chapters View all Explore the podcast 101 episodes The Optispan Podcast with Matt Kaeberlein Dr Matt Kaeberlein Podcasts Transcript Follow along using the transcript. Show transcript Dr Matt Kaeberlein 14.1K subscribers Videos About 122 Comments rongmaw lin Add a comment... Pinned by Dr Matt Kaeberlein @sgcarney 4 months ago (edited) Thanks for doing this reaction video. Looking forward to watching. It would have been great to have Matt in my video, but at least I can hear his reaction now. One thing that is tricky about reaction videos is that it's easy to make unsubstantiated conclusions when you pause the video to make a point that is answered in the following sentences. Not to belabor the point, but at 31:02 Matt says "Ok Scott, why don't you show me the publications records of Andrew Huberman and Peter Attia and we will see how much they have dominated the literature." YT's automod will probably remove the link if I post it here, but on my channel I did EXACTLY that when showing how Huberman used his position in Cell Reports Medicine to get Susanna Soberg's terrible research on BAT published. But you paused the video in a way that you came to a conclusion before seeing evidence. Which is basically what you are accusing me of throughout your reaction. I think this has a lot to do with the format. It might be better to watch the whole video first and then watch it again to add your reaction on the second play through. Flash edit: Throughout the video (54:07 for example) Matt suggests that when I say "the immortality grift" that I'm saying that Sinclair believes he's selling actual immortality, and you accuse me of not understanding the difference between immortality and longevity. What you fail to notice is that I'm saying a complete phrase "immortality grift" which is the type of scam that has been around for thousands of years and that Sinclair continues to sell with his various pills. Perhaps I was not clear enough on that point when I explained it in the intro as it does seem some commenters in my video made the same conclusion. The "immortality grift" is selling a thing that does not exist. This results in Matt misconstruing my words to make a straw man argument. 21 Reply 8 replies @keefeweekers5739 4 months ago Sinclair really showed what he is after his deal with the FDA. Thanks for other professors for exposing Sinclair's lies. 26 Reply @CraigHocker 4 months ago Thanks for the more sober discussion. Sinclair’s tendency to indulge in hype shouldn’t be countered with sensationalist journalism. This podcast was a good antidote. Thanks for deciding to post what had to be an uncomfortable show. Really it is worrying that other longevity scientists have stayed quiet about the product marketed for dogs. 27 Reply 2 replies @dannyhaynes6944 4 months ago (edited) This changed my mind on that Sinclair piece by Scott, which is hugely valuable to me. Please keep it up. 16 Reply @michelsamson3689 4 months ago Bravo, Matt! I have been following the more prominent people in the healthspan/aging space and you are by far the fairest and clear-headed proponent of this field. And by the way, I love dogs too. My oldest is going to be 16 yrs old this month and with the aid of rapamycin he is still doing quite well. Thanks again for this unbiased video. 6 Reply @Nick_Henri 4 months ago Glad you decided to air this and much appreciate your candid, transparent and very well informed perspective! 8 Reply 1 reply @ulric_official 4 months ago This reaction video is just outstanding, halfway through really enjoying it, wishing I could give it some more thumbs up. Lots of insight into “the industry” so to speak, great reactions to various BS😂, while coming from the perspective of someone who went into it fresh without any particular agenda 👏 👏 6 Reply @adjusted-bunny 4 months ago I am glad that episode aired. I have always gotten snake oil salesman vibes from D.S. 17 Reply @ulric_official 4 months ago This reaction video is gold, hopefully gets more views and more subscribers for the channel 🙏 7 Reply @jorgefunes5925 4 months ago I like your talks as they are impartial and without a hidden agenda as others 5 Reply @PinataOblongata 4 months ago Thanks for deciding to air this, I like the targets Scott is going after, the investigation adding to the picture of said targets, and I feel like his motivations are largely the right ones. I do agree his language and hyperbole needs to be cleaned up if he wants to be the bastion of truth-seeking and bringing-the-receipts that I think he wants to be. Seeing his discussion with Dr Mike the other day, it seems he also thinks about presenting things as if it was a court case, so it might be putting it in those terms could give him some pause for thought about the language used or how much research he does into a field that one of his targets operates in. I would like to see you guys in discussion, mostly because you could probably help each other in just presenting honest and "debunking" information online, which the world is sorely in need of atm. 4 Reply @FXDUBOIS 4 months ago It is to your credit that you had to say out loud what others knew but preferred to keep quiet... Keep the great work for the sake of science 👍 6 Reply @adam-356 4 months ago Thank you Matt, these kind of discussions and reactions are important for outsiders like me to form an own opinion. Please continue your data driven work and share your findings and opinions with the community. 2 Reply @yairkoren5268 4 months ago This was really great; some of the best value I got from a "Matt video". While the scientific work about resveratrol is probably great, the concept of the channel is to democratize such information for the more general public. This episode/format does exactly this and I'd be thrilled to see more of this kind of content. 2 Reply @popkinbobkin 4 months ago Well I guess David Sinclair is more of a businessman now than a scientist. And to get people interested and money flowing you need to become somewhat of a snake oil guy. He was actually the reason I personally learned about all this longevity stuff and I was excited exactly because of those claims that I now know are exagerated. Let's hope that his lies eventually don't kill the interest in the fied and disappoint people, and it's great we have people like Matt who can keep people's trust in the science. 8 Reply 1 reply @patriciasanchezwebb 1 month ago 7:21 You effectively say that you've never "heard" Sinclair talk of immortality. Yet just a few moments earlier you admit that you've never read Sinclair's book, Lifespan. In Lifespan, Sinclair certainly does imply that at some point people will be able to turn back that the aging clock over and over again. Sinclair doesn't say there will be a definite limit. 1 Reply @joparr4081 1 month ago (edited) What about Sinclair explaining that the reproduction of Resveratrol results being done incorrectly???!! You didnt read the addendum he published on how you are supposed to do it "every other day"...pulsing the supplement??? Therefore needs to be a cellular recovery period ... 1 Reply @KevinBrown-sz6eq 4 months ago Hi Matt, these reaction videos are valuable but it would be nice to get some more theory of aging type videos if you think your viewers would like it. For example I think it would be great to see you interview Josh Middledorf and contrast your opinions on the foundational causes of aging and on the accuracy of epigenetic clocks etc. I think you could also have a fantastic discussion with Mike Levin of Tuffs. Thanks Matt. 7 Reply @droprelease4820 4 months ago Thank you Matt, you explained in much nicer terms the gripes that I had with Scott's video! I wish his original video had more nuance in his discussion of David as a bad actor 1 Reply @virginiaferrarini 4 months ago Less hype and spin and more real stuff: this is what I'm looking for! Thanks 1 Reply Dr Matt Kaeberlein · 1 reply @fatboydim.7037 4 months ago Great informative podcast and interesting to see you take on this upload. Although I accept that Sinclair is a 'complex' character I have seen him post pictures regarding his father of late who looks in great condition and takes NAD boosters. My question revolves around partial cellular reprogramming, as which I understand Metro Biotech are advancing towards human clinical trial in 2025-possibly. Are you telling us that the science around this is also spurious ? because of Sinclair's involvement. Alot of people's quality of lives have been enhanced through his podcasts something that alot of detractors don't seem to be happy to focus upon. 2 Reply @gabymalembe 4 months ago I take a lot of the supplements that David Sinclair says work on mice though he always says he doesn’t know if they work on people, because maybe one of them actually works. If I were young I’d wait for some proof, but I’m not. 7 Reply @omvilla7469 4 months ago I hear you Matt... and other exceptics... we actually should never believe everything, they are all partial truths... anyways... my only issue here is: Why is Sinclair the only one who seems not to be getting older when compared to other scientists and Longevity advocates...?? I can mention so many that look so much older...🤔🤔 Some of Sinclair's science must be truth... 😮🤔🤔 4 Reply @jds02153 4 months ago top shelf 👍👍 2 Reply @Stemwellrestore 4 months ago (edited) Jeunesse Global sold Resveratrol in gel form and the results were incredible . Now i am confused because there are/were results, positive ones, when sick clients took the resveratrol satchets. 😮 1 Reply @Maple597 4 months ago Fabulous podcast! Keep it up! 1 Reply Dr Matt Kaeberlein · 1 reply @invertage 4 months ago I feel the same with the snake oil for dog lifespan. World record dog age record broken last year was 31 yrs old. Before that it was 29 years old. All natural diet seems to be the factors in these. Feeding a dog garbage kibble will shorten their life. Poor breeding practices by humans also a factor, they were all originally wolves. Cat record is currently 38 years. Give them a natural diet, plenty of exercise and a loving home, that's what they need. 2 Reply @briansykes2806 3 months ago I am very interested in this field, but it is hard for me to comment since I am very lacking in knowledge in genetics, etc. I certainly agree that research must be rigorously done and results should be expressed in moderate, not sensationalist terms. I like Matt Kaeberlein's general approach, although I have not seen a proper evaluation of his own research to date. Regarding funding, I have always thought this should come from another field entirely - not the pharmaceutical industry. 1 Reply @ZeitgeistHomer 4 months ago Excellent video. I love that you state the facts as they are without minimizing or exaggerating the truth. Now please, do an episode on Novos Labs and their supplements. They claim you are a consultant. Reply @jogeirmyklebust 4 months ago thank you for yet another great podcast! Reply @hoffmancapote 4 months ago Thanks for a great video. By the way glad you decided to publish this video. A decision will make Reply @33Crazydude 4 months ago Although we're not there yet, I believe that the only way we'll make a significant impact on both lifespan and healthspan is through the use of highly advanced AI. While there’s a lot of hype, if AI makes substantial progress in the next decade, it could unlock groundbreaking advancements in anti-aging science. However, the future remains highly uncertain. 1 Reply @diliu3460 4 months ago I just want to point out that the character "寿" on the background wall means longevity in Chinese, which I suppose was intended with good intentions. However, I have to say that Chinese people usually display these characters on walls at funerals, specifically in black and white. So that gives an unintended vibe here. lol. 1 Reply Dr Matt Kaeberlein · 1 reply @SilverFan21k 4 months ago Haha unexpected to see you cover this topic 😂 1 Reply @dude861 4 months ago Overall very, very ground based, smart and convincing explanations. Love your style and your perspective. Reply Dr Matt Kaeberlein · 1 reply @zombi3lif3 4 months ago Thank you for making this video. Reply @omvilla7469 4 months ago Or let's hope that despite trying to make a buck... or billions, some of those products actually work.... I do take some of them, and I am definitely much younger looking and energetic than many of my peers... 🤔🤔 oh well.... keep posting, this Longevity science is so interesting...👍👍 2 Reply @askingwhy123 4 months ago Biggest possible face turn: Sinalclair throws himself on Matt's mercy and redeems himself as a scientist. Imagine the clicks! 1 Reply @kurtrichardson-wv8yk 2 months ago Solid video Reply @jayalanlife5926 4 months ago Great episode guys, I would like to see an equivalent on exercise and diet Reply @Samucacamilo 4 months ago Matt please write a book. 1 Reply Dr Matt Kaeberlein · 1 reply @douglaswatt1582 4 months ago (edited) This sensationalist journalist piece by Scott Carney reminds me of a recent hit piece on Elon Musk. In between the black and the white are the shades of grey Of course that doesn't sell, esp. on YouTube, as well as spectacular and wild claims and counterclaims which people seem to gravitate towards unfortunately. So great to have Matt functioning as such a level-headed scientist and role model in a completely hype riddled space. I was always skeptical of David Sinclair the second he started making claims that he had found THE regulator of Aging. No such thing it's a whole network of factors obviously, operating in complex interaction, and it's pretty clear we don't know all the factors or understand all their interactions. 8 Reply @in2caffeine 4 months ago sinclair is pushing the public awareness over longevity research, and that is a good thing. he is imaginative and speculative, which is what is needed to really push the needle. 5 Reply 1 reply @bagus853 1 day ago The moment I first encountered his content about NMN on YouTube, my intuition immediately raised red flags. There's something about his presentation style and approach that feels inauthentic, particularly when discussing such an important scientific topic as NMN supplementation. I encourage others to carefully evaluate health-related content and trust their instincts when something doesn't feel right Reply @jonathonmills3563 4 months ago Scott is worse than the people he’s vilified. Hyperbole, exaggeration and nonsense 7 Reply 1 reply @TheBiffsterLife 4 months ago Having followed this closely, it appeared you didn’t go after Sinclair as hard as Charles Brenner did, while being in as good or better position to do so. Were you concerned about Sinclair’s influence? 1 Reply @houndofzoltan 4 months ago I'm a huge fan of Peter Attia and through him Matt Kaeberlein, but I've never really warmed to Andrew Huberman: I always feel he's faking it til he makes it. 1 Reply @JerzeyBird 4 months ago (edited) Glad that you gave perspective on Carney's video. I have some issues with Huberman, but I felt Carney's take down of him was straight up Page Six level. Also didn't think his POV on Attia was all that balanced. Despite their domination of the literature - hilarious. Too bad, because I loved his book on Wim Hof, but I hesitate to recommend it and no longer watch his channel. Carney and Sinclair have some tendencies in common. Eh, that soundtrack? lol. 3 Reply @Nelis1324 4 months ago I'm curious what this says about his current work. People keep giving him a platform as well. Reply @jaykraft9523 4 months ago (edited) You analyzed the wrong video, the Stanfield $720,000,000 Train Wreck video is much less sensational, lots less fluff, and has just the facts. It's just as damning of Sinclair without hyper-editorializing 4 Reply @robin-jewsbury 4 months ago I've never liked the phrase "no evidence for" when referring to something not happening in the future - lots of domain experts have failed spectacularly on this one. But in the case of "no evidence for longevity escape velocity", there clearly is and will be no evidence for 2 future events with the 2nd future event being long way in the future. I would not expect any evidence until near the 2nd event occurring - so we will reach longevity escape velocity without knowing it (no evidence), and won't know it until looking back at the 1st event in the past, from the 2nd event . So saying no evidence is sort of pointless/meaningless. 6 Reply @Halbared 4 months ago Bloke is using a jackanory voice. On a journo level, he's Stossel. 1 Reply @anthonyhopper7830 4 months ago At some point, you might think about creating a podcast that focuses on the bottlenecks in the geroscience field. You've mentioned some of them during your discussions/episodes. However, I don't think you've dedicated an episode to delineating them in detail. Your viewers who are non-scientists, like me, might find that information to be not only interesting but also useful (e.g., in helping us to decide where to donate/how to advocate for the field). PS. IMO only, "good old boy" networks might not exist in the life sciences, but they are definitely "a thing" in some humanities and social science fields (at least from my personal experiences). Reply @williamhenry3337 4 months ago Why does he have a million views and you only have a dozen views? Why do YOU have the TRUTH and others don't? 1 Reply @popkinbobkin 4 months ago Also would love to hear your opinion on current research of David Siclair. How legit is his epigenetic reprogramming stuff? What is the new "age reversing" molecule he is mentioning lately? There's a new video with him on youtube at the Aspen Institute, maybe Matt would be interested in commenting on it 3 Reply @houndofzoltan 4 months ago Given that Matt is here talking about this, why didn't he accept the offer to be interviewed? Wouldn't that have been a better time to point out these errors? 2 Reply 1 reply @houndofzoltan 4 months ago "So far, never paid off" is also poor grammar: should just be "haven't paid off so far" 1 Reply @allehelgen 4 months ago Could you do a vidéo on saunas ? 1 Reply @Halbared 4 months ago (edited) Trust tried to watch a few of his videos. Oooof. Something off about him. Chasing. 💨 Reminds me of the carpetbagger from Josey Wales. Reply @drewmccu258 4 months ago Pretty sure this is the guy from the Huberman hitpiece. Reply @stephenfaris6865 4 months ago I wonder if we could build a chemical model of a human and then apply AI to do complex what ifs? Reply @barzinlotfabadi 4 months ago We're not going to resolve this in the Octagon? I hear that's how it's done these days 😛 Reply @ananiadoesgaming8808 4 months ago You’re so obsessed with Dr. Sinclair Leave him alone 2 Reply 1 reply @portalminer8813 4 months ago As they say, there's two sides to every story. We've just heard one side. 1 Reply @Amun92 4 months ago Oops Galaxo and Harvard! 1 Reply @GAURAV_Feb 2 months ago First of all thanks for making this reaction video.. really helps to hear directly from the horse’s mouth.. However, it just worries me that this is the just an example of the Rapamycin Gang vs Resveretrol-NMN gang arguing!! Peter Attia and Matt Kaemberlin are gung ho on Rapa so potentially they have a motive to be against other CR memdics !! Also it just confuses me that Peter Attia sings songs about one stuff and then realizes that it’s actually toxic.. happened with metformin!! And vice versa with ozempic where he initially was against it and now he’s in the maybe zone!! It would be the joke of the century if it turns out that Rapa is useless as well!! Reply 1 reply @bostaurus1 4 months ago Thanks but guys devoting 5 or 10 mins to some minor issue at 35 was a bit off topic. On whether going to each other podcasts is similar to Harvard not taking action Reply @AS-gx4qg 4 months ago Read David's book. He claimed immortality. Reply @PakistanIcecream000 4 months ago Good video content but its introduction music is a bit off-putting for my taste. Reply @anatoly60 4 months ago I don't understand this guy, why is he bad mouthing others !? Why not challenge David to a debate ? 1 Reply @PaulWolf-t2h 4 months ago Sinclair is a scammer. But you have to be careful about everyone working in this field. There is a tendency to exaggerate. Reply @bogrunberger 4 months ago I get that Matt comes at this as a scientist and I completely agree with his arguments. However most of what David Sinclair does is that he goes on podcasts and he addresses ordinary people who have no chance of evaluating what's complete BS and what's actually solid of what David says. That's why I think that for ordinary people it would be better to completely disregard David Sinclair because he's proven that he exagurates and sometimes even approaches lying, and for us ordinary people it's impossible to tell when we should listen and when we shouldn't. What Sinclair has done is extremely damaging to the whole scientific longevity field because most people just see that another snake oil salesman has proven that it's all BS. It will take years to recover from what Sinclair's done I think. 1 Reply @jamesstrom6991 3 months ago anyone mildly interested in health span pegged Sinclair for a grifter years ago. Reply @wmp3346 4 months ago Matt may have an ax to grind? 1 Reply 1 reply @adamspongB6F1 4 months ago Matt continues to equivocate between dismissing fraudulent claims that longevity escape velocity is empirically imminent—and rejecting radical life extension as the appropriate conceptual goal of aging research. He snidely rejects all “futurists” as purveyors of the arbitrary, and he fails to understand the epistemological validity and essential role of inductive prediction in scientific development. Matt is smearing everyone who advocates for conceptual and moral clarity about the real value of pursuing aging research, and he’s hiding behind the kind of dishonest, myopic-on-principle “healthspan” spins that most people who fear the social opprobrium and ridicule that waits for any explicit and principled advocate for life extension resort to. Put simply, this is no more logically valid than rejecting “curing cancer” as an appropriate medical goal, and then pointing to some straw man crackpot claiming he can cure cancer now with household products as proof that the idea as such is pseudoscience. Matt should know better than this. At best, this is logical confusion. At worst, it is moral cowardice of the sort that drives a great many aging researchers to adopt a public affect of self-righteously short-sighted scientific obscurantism. Hiding from the inductively-established possibility of radical life extension—in the name of superior scientific subtlety? This is moral cowardice, not scientific sophistication. 1 Reply @jonathonmills3563 4 months ago David Sinclair doesn’t sell NMN. 3 Reply 2 replies @davidderidder2667 4 months ago They are corrupt and not as nefarious? Come on Matt, make up your mind, you are sending mixed and conflicting messages. With an already pretty overstretched collective public attention span, this is not what I believe is what will really helps clarify. Reply