Source https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2025/07/preclinical-studies-of-means-to-slow-and-reverse-aging-are-more-haphazard-than-is-desired/
Any life scientist who has written a meta-analysis or systematic review of preclinical or clinical studies is likely capable of complaining at length and in detail about the lack of standardization, the myriad ways in which small differences in study design can sabotage any attempt at comparison, the critical details missing from published study methods, the misleading interpretations and summaries observed in the abstracts of a sizable minority of papers, and so forth. From some perspectives the literature is a mess, as you might expect when thousands of people with little incentive to conform to any one viewpoint set forth to pursue their own ideas about how to run a study.
Paper-length complaints about this situation can be found in the literature. You might recall a recent <a href="https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2024/03/bemoaning-the-lack-o…
Source https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2025/07/preclinical-studies-of-means-to-slow-and-reverse-aging-are-more-haphazard-than-is-desired/
Any life scientist who has written a meta-analysis or systematic review of preclinical or clinical studies is likely capable of complaining at length and in detail about the lack of standardization, the myriad ways in which small differences in study design can sabotage any attempt at comparison, the critical details missing from published study methods, the misleading interpretations and summaries observed in the abstracts of a sizable minority of papers, and so forth. From some perspectives the literature is a mess, as you might expect when thousands of people with little incentive to conform to any one viewpoint set forth to pursue their own ideas about how to run a study.
Paper-length complaints about this situation can be found in the literature. You might recall a recent <a href="https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2024/03/bemoaning-the-lack-o…
What Do You Think?
comments