David Sinclair· PhD
Calling aging itself a disease broadens the definition of disease to the point of uselessness.
Loading…
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.
Calling aging itself a disease broadens the definition of disease to the point of uselessness.
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.
Labeling aging a disease could fuel ageism. Employers already assume older adults are less capable. The “disease” label may reinforce stereotypes and discrimination
Calling aging a disease doesn’t actually help science. Geroscientists can (and do) study aging’s mechanisms without the label. The risks outweigh the benefits
so calling aging a disease is a fundamental error the question itself is incorrect
is aging a disease is that even a relevant question call me calling me calling me so calling aging a disease is a fundamental oror the question itself is incorrect I agree completely I think it's the wrong question
I don't think it's a disease I think that destroys the word disease if we include Aging in it uh but I think there was a reason that suddenly this came because you thought oh maybe this will get Congress to pay attention you're right it's a a it's a marketing Ploy
I think we have that idea for marketing purposes not for scientific purpos purposes and the idea is well the money goes to diseases let's call aging a disease
the other point that people often raise though is we have to call aging a disease in order for FDA to approve a drug for aging which I think is a fundamental misunderstanding of how FDA operates but that is the other argument you you will often hear among proponents of the idea that aging is a disease
so saying that aging is a disease confuses that discussion it makes it impossible to see that relationship so calling aging a disease is a fundamental error the question itself is incorrect
I think we have that idea for marketing purposes not for scientific purposes and the idea is well the money goes to diseases let's call aging a disease because I think what we're trying to do is we're trying to treat aging as if it were a disease even though I I would agree with both of you I don't think it's a disease I think that destroys the word disease if we include Aging in it U but I think there was a reason that suddenly this came because you thought oh maybe this will get Congress to pay attention you're right it's a a it's a marketing Ploy