6 replies·
Epitalon is marketed on telomerase activation and therefore on slowing ageing. The page marks it evidence: none and carries a safety note about telomerase that I think is the most interesting sentence on the whole site.
Namely: telomerase is not straightforwardly good. Cancer cells need it.
That is the crux and it is routinely inverted in the marketing.
The reasoning goes: telomeres shorten with age, short telomeres are associated with cellular senescence, therefore lengthening them reverses ageing. Each step is a real observation and the conclusion does not follow.
Telomere shortening is a limit on how many times a cell can divide. That limit is a tumour suppression mechanism. It is one of the things standing between a cell that has acquired damage and a cell that divides without end. The large majority of human cancers reactivate telomerase precisely in order to get past it.
So "increase telomerase activity" is not an unambiguous anti-ageing intervention. It is removing a brake, and the brake is there for a reason. Anyone in the field treats deliberate telomerase activation as a thing requiring care, and the supplement framing treats it as an obvious win.
On the evidence base specifically, since I can read some of the original material.
Most of it comes from one institute in St Petersburg, over a long period, largely publishing on its own compounds. The mouse lifespan work is theirs. The cell culture telomerase work is theirs. That is not a reason to dismiss it, but independent replication outside that programme is thin, and the English-language summaries almost never say where the work came from.
There is also human work cited that is much older and much smaller than its reputation, and reads as such when you get to it.
Which is the pattern from the BPC-157 thread again. One programme, a long publication list, an appearance of depth that thins out when you ask how many independent groups.
Note that the effect users actually report most consistently is better sleep, and the page says so.
Sleep is the most placebo-responsive endpoint anybody has ever tried to measure. Self-reported, high day-to-day variance, strongly affected by expectation and by the act of paying attention to it. If a compound's most reliable reported effect is improved sleep, that tells you approximately nothing.
The longevity category is turning out to be the weakest on the site by some margin. Boldest claims, thinnest data, most single-source literature.
Sign in or create an account to reply.