“I don’t care about red wine,” Dr. David Sinclair told the Boston Globe in a story that ran on Monday. Why should we care that he doesn’t care?
Sinclair, associate professor in Harvard Medical School’s Department of Pathology, is the lead researcher in the much-reported study about resveratrol and aging. He and his research team found that resveratrol extended life in yeast cells first, then tried it on mice. The mice not only lived longer but had lower incidence of diabetes.
Resveratrol is a naturally occurring component in red wine among other things. Lab mice were given the equivalent amount of resveratrol as a human would find in 300 glasses of wine.
So what’s up with the ‘tude, dude? Why denigrate red wine in it’s entirety? Where’s the respect for the French Paradox? Or intellectual curiosity? Or gastronomic adventure? He’s from Australia, after all. He may win a medal one day for his research on aging, but I doubt anyone is going to send him a case of shiraz with an attitude like that toward the fruits of the vine.
The 37 year old researcher is obsessed with mortality (if he wants to postpone death, what does he do with his equally inevitable tax payments?). “Aging is the worst thing that has ever been put upon humanity,” he told the Globe. Well, I guess he’ll be popping pills–not corks–til he’s old and crinkly. But he might just want to chill out from time to time, live that long life a bit, and have a glass of old vine grenache.
“His research targets the aging process”, Boston Globe
Sinclair Lab, with pics of him and his research team
“Resveratrol now promises cardiovascular sloth” [Dr. V]
“BREAKING: resveratrol extends life and promises free gluttony” [Dr. V]