We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
but somehow it's become knocking out daft2 or daf 16 was tantamount to dropping IVF uh igf insulin like growth factor one to zero is the key to longevity and the way to do that is to have no protein and I think that story is is so incorrect but somehow it's become part of Dogma
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 think this story got confounded by our good friend C elegans right so let's go back 29 years roughly call it 30 years directionally when some very seminal and interesting work was published looking at the daf 16 mutation in or maybe it was daf2 I can't remember if it was daf 2 first or daf 16 but it was the analog of the igf receptor and if you knocked out that Gene you could double the lifespan from roughly two weeks to four weeks or four weeks to eight weeks I forget what it was of uh C elegans this worm and the implication of that was profound
knocked out daf2 or daf 16 was tantamount to dropping IVF uh igf igf insulin like growth factor one to zero is the key to longevity and the way to do that is to have no protein and I think that story is is so incorrect but somehow it's become part of Dogma
I could go on my rant about why C elegans is not an organism or a or an animal model that offers any insight into us