Do you think that weak studies are generally not worth doing, and that we should rather prefer to either do a well-powered study or none at all? I personally believe that underpowered studies can still be valuable, depending on the context of the existing research in the field, but I wonder if you would disagree.
In practice, should we consider that people will likely misinterpret the study results when deciding which studies we should do?
Probably your most interesting guest in a while. and decentralizing science isn't even on the same level as the priority for stopping SHIT science. you can descentralize garbage and you will still have garbage. the key is having quality and filtering out the garbage. this guy is great. admitting that longevity is mostly bullshit and that the most low hanging fruit is to prevent genetic diseases of all kinds, which is so compelling it should be nearly mandatory. the basis of a new religion even. prophylactic good-genics ( eugenics ) is so far and away the most useful long term social policy for good health, that it's not really in the same ball park as testing for all this longevity crap, almost all of which won't work out as clinical applications. as for basic research that is non-clinical, you don' need to fda, almost no regulation for any of that.
most of polio was eradicated before the vaccine by basic sanitation.
his attitude on vaccines , however, is not well informed. fear based campaigning leverages 'public health benefits' to pull off a long term capture of all of society to SHIT science. the last mrna therapy weren't even vaccines, they changed the definition of vaccines and never even tested them effectively to force them upon everyone.
that the link between the two of these things was not discussed is probably revealing.
i love that he is calling out siinclair, or repeating sinclair's patterns is basically not just shit science, but FRAUD.
and this is what it is happening.
really, STOP with 'longevity' bottom line is healthspan and just doing fundamental research into metabolism. there is not non-fraudulent longevity Clinical research. it's all a lie.
funny how this guy says grifting is a cause of the autism epidemic, then that it's just diagnosis swapping from retarded to autistic. this is extremely disingenuous. makes me question his honestly at least on 'vaccine mandates' which are an extremely charged topic given the outright systemic fraud in the space. so this guy acknowledges systemic fraud in drugs research but not so much in 'vaccine' research and policy. this is highly suspect.
Great convo! I would really love to know:
Do you think that weak studies are generally not worth doing, and that we should rather prefer to either do a well-powered study or none at all? I personally believe that underpowered studies can still be valuable, depending on the context of the existing research in the field, but I wonder if you would disagree.
In practice, should we consider that people will likely misinterpret the study results when deciding which studies we should do?
Probably your most interesting guest in a while. and decentralizing science isn't even on the same level as the priority for stopping SHIT science. you can descentralize garbage and you will still have garbage. the key is having quality and filtering out the garbage. this guy is great. admitting that longevity is mostly bullshit and that the most low hanging fruit is to prevent genetic diseases of all kinds, which is so compelling it should be nearly mandatory. the basis of a new religion even. prophylactic good-genics ( eugenics ) is so far and away the most useful long term social policy for good health, that it's not really in the same ball park as testing for all this longevity crap, almost all of which won't work out as clinical applications. as for basic research that is non-clinical, you don' need to fda, almost no regulation for any of that.
most of polio was eradicated before the vaccine by basic sanitation.
his attitude on vaccines , however, is not well informed. fear based campaigning leverages 'public health benefits' to pull off a long term capture of all of society to SHIT science. the last mrna therapy weren't even vaccines, they changed the definition of vaccines and never even tested them effectively to force them upon everyone.
that the link between the two of these things was not discussed is probably revealing.
i love that he is calling out siinclair, or repeating sinclair's patterns is basically not just shit science, but FRAUD.
and this is what it is happening.
really, STOP with 'longevity' bottom line is healthspan and just doing fundamental research into metabolism. there is not non-fraudulent longevity Clinical research. it's all a lie.
funny how this guy says grifting is a cause of the autism epidemic, then that it's just diagnosis swapping from retarded to autistic. this is extremely disingenuous. makes me question his honestly at least on 'vaccine mandates' which are an extremely charged topic given the outright systemic fraud in the space. so this guy acknowledges systemic fraud in drugs research but not so much in 'vaccine' research and policy. this is highly suspect.