Bryan Johnson· Author
We completed a fairly extensive literature search and concluded there is supporting evidence for its usage for acute therapies but there was insufficient evidence to use it for our objective of biological aging.
Loading…
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 completed a fairly extensive literature search and concluded there is supporting evidence for its usage for acute therapies but there was insufficient evidence to use it for our objective of biological aging.
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.
But it's uh Hbot for longevity is not in this category where the evidence is, you know, airtight. Like you can just say it's tried and true. It's it's really still emergent. And as recent as a study in 2020 out of Israel where it kind of put this on the map with Telmare elongation, but still then people were, you know, as all things in science, it wasn't like it was this panacea. There was still some disagreement on whether or not it was uh study was done well, whether it's robust, etc.