The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
we iterated and we did experiment after experiment and the data held strong in mice that clotho overexpression really enhanced their cognition in young mice in aging mice in mice that modeled Alzheimer's disease and um also in mice in a publication that's in peer review now but also in mice that model Parkinson's disease
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
I almost think that in this case Dena stating that it is statistically significant which it is almost undersells what I think the magnitude of the differences are
the mice that overexpressed clotho that live longer were smarter so you put them in a maze they could map the room better Escape quicker not because they were swimming faster not because they could see better but because they were remembering and learning more efficiently