Thread by @CharlesMBrenner

today @davidasinclair is telling the world that he has achieved age reversal with chemical cocktails

he submitted the paper on June 30 & it was accepted on July 4 by a journal of which he is coeditor-in-chief

paper was sent to me 3 days ago by a reporter for comment

reporter was told it is a "groundbreaking study" & "the first chemical approach to reprogram cells to a younger state"

reason WSJ didn't cover that paper is that ppl have been reporting chemical compounds that drive conversion of cells to induced pluripotency for the last 10-15 years

all of the compounds in today's paper were previously reported by others, mostly in 2013

it is a known property of these compounds to change gene expression & epigenetic age--valproic acid, etc, are targeted at the epigenetic state--that is how they work

getting these readouts on cells is not a groundbreaking study on reversal of aging

high throughput assays to identify such chemical matter were originally described by Vendrell in 2012

unlike today's paper, Vendrell identified a new compound with their method 11 yrs ago

Sinclair claims that his chemical cocktail (actually chemical cocktails developed by others) do not change cell identity but they did not do single cell sequencing to evaluate cell identity--only bulk sequencing, which cannot address this question

what i found interesting is that David earlier retracted his claim that his recent Cell paper demonstrated tissue rejuvenation--in a now deleted tweet, he wrote to @Sri_Baqri @CellCellPress saying his words in the Cell paper were misunderstood

but in the new paper, he says that the Cell paper showed that the epigenome "can be reset via partial reprogramming to regain tissue function"

he even says "reverse aspects of aging and extend lifespan in mice, paralleling treatment with AAV-OSK"

!!!

testing the patience of the Cell editors. 1st, he overstated his conclusions in Cell. 2nd, he said he was misinterpreted. 3rd, he cited the Cell paper as extending lifespan, which he surely didn't do

so, in brief, david is publishing _other ppl's compounds_ to do chemical reprogramming

he _did not test_ whether the compounds change cellular identity

yet he is _claiming groundbreaking results_ in this paper and in Cell that just aren't there