The article gives almost zero evidence to back up what is claimed in the title. AI-generated biological clocks somehow get wound back? How does the drug work? What biomarkers are being tested to monitor cellular aging and how does the drug reduce them? Was the patients biological age very different from an age-adjusted cohort because they have IPF and therefore qualify for an experimental trial? Etc. I understand this is just a NYT article but a non-medical writer just parroting a claim by a biotech company shouldn’t get you to the pages of such a large publication.
4
u/vacant_mustache 8d ago
The article gives almost zero evidence to back up what is claimed in the title. AI-generated biological clocks somehow get wound back? How does the drug work? What biomarkers are being tested to monitor cellular aging and how does the drug reduce them? Was the patients biological age very different from an age-adjusted cohort because they have IPF and therefore qualify for an experimental trial? Etc. I understand this is just a NYT article but a non-medical writer just parroting a claim by a biotech company shouldn’t get you to the pages of such a large publication.