I think the comment also said that this person’s views aren’t taken seriously in the aging research community. So the combination of their ideas and a desire to profit from them raises flags.
I don't think Harvard would let Sinclair have a lab with some 35 people and publish articles under their name if he was a total fraud/quack.
My impression of Sinclair is that he likes public attention too much and often reports on work in progress with too much certainty, but results like this [1] seem to be fairly impressive.
My impression of Sinclair is that he likes public attention too much and often reports on work in progress with too much certainty, but results like this [1] seem to be fairly impressive.
[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2975-4