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.
So one of the main distinguishing features is with DNA damage, there's a pathway that increases cytokines like IL-6, IL-8, these are very prominent pro-inflammatory cytokines. That doesn't happen with bad mitochondria so that loop is pretty much not activated.
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.
So we can now pretty much determine whether a cell has become senescent due to DNA damage versus bad mitochondria based on their secretory profile. There's overlap, don't get me wrong there's overlap but there's also distinct features that the mitochondria are responsible for, bad mitochondria are responsible for versus damaged DNA.