Fat Mice;Red Wine
By giving mice a chemical, resveratrol, found in red wine (and blueberries and peanuts) in extremely high doses, researchers have found they can reverse the effects of a high fat diet and extend lifespan.

The NYTimes article presents the research and the researchers very favorably with little questioning. Some paragraphs screaming for critical analysis:
Dr. Richard Hodes, director of the National Institute on Aging, which helped support the study, also said that people should wait for the results of safety testing. Substances that are safe and beneficial in small doses, like vitamins, sometimes prove to be harmful when taken in high doses, Dr. Hodes said.

One person who is not following this prudent advice, however, is Dr. Sinclair, the chief author of the study. He has long been taking resveratrol, though at a dose of only five milligrams per kilogram. Mice given that amount in a second feeding trial have shown similar, but less pronounced, results as those on the 24-milligram-a-day dose, he said.

Dr. Sinclair has had a physician check his metabolism, because many resveratrol preparations contain possibly hazardous impurities, but so far no ill effects have come to light. His wife, his parents, and “half my lab” are also taking resveratrol, he said.

Dr. Sinclair declined to name his source of resveratrol. Many companies sell the substance, along with claims that rivals’ preparations are inactive. One such company, Longevinex, sells an extract of red wine and knotweed that contains an unspecified amount of resveratrol. But each capsule is equivalent to “5 to 15 5-ounce glasses of the best red wine,” the company’s Web site asserts.

Dr. Sinclair is the founder of a company, Sirtris Pharmaceuticals, that has developed several chemicals intended to mimic the role of resveratrol but at much lower doses. Sirtris has begun clinical trials of one of these compounds, an improved version of resveratrol, with the aim of seeing if it helps control glucose levels in people with diabetes.
So, the lead scientist is on the board of directors of a company working on an anti-aging product and other therapeutics. He's taking a resveratrol supplement, his family is taking it, and his lab is taking it. He won't say where he's getting it. That smells like it's either made by his company or a deal between companies.

Critics point out that resveratrol is a powerful chemical that acts in many different ways in cells. The new experiment, they say, does not prove that resveratrol negated the effects of a high-calorie diet by activating SIRT-1. Indeed, they are not convinced that resveratrol activates SIRT-1 at all.
“It hasn’t really been clearly shown, the way a biochemist would want to see it, that resveratrol can activate sirtuin,” said Matt Kaeberlein, a former student of Dr. Guarente’s who does research at the University of Washington in Seattle. Sirtuin is the protein produced by the SIRT-1 gene.
A former student (who I couldn't find listed on the Sirtris website) gets a call from the NYTimes and doesn't give a nice quote? That smells fishy too.

Dr. Sinclair said experiments at Sirtris had essentially wrapped up this point. But they have not yet been published, so under the rules of scientific debate he cannot use them to support his position. In his Nature article he therefore has to concede that “Whether resveratrol acts directly or indirectly through Sir-2 in vivo is currently a subject of debate.”
The lead scientist publishes a Nature paper and leaves out whether the chemical of interest acts through the gene of interest in the whole animal (in vivo) studies? That's incredible. We're left to take him at his word. Is he planning on publishing the studies that "wrap" up the point? I hope so. Science moves forward by putting your work out there and subjecting it to critical review. This is one of the huge problems with the commercialization of science; there's no peer review or opportunity to test the repeatability of results.

How objective can he be about this? He: a) owns a company with an interest in seeing resveratrol "work"; and b) is, with his family and lab members, taking resveratrol.

I've been through the commercialization of a technology from within a university start-up company. It can be an ugly affair. I'll spend some time writing about that sometime.

I can't help imagining this hypothetical scenario: Sinclair's students are reluctantly taking this supplement in the hopes that he'll bring them into the goldmine he's sure the company will be; he talks about this endlessly. The truth is he won't bring anyone into the fold in a meaningful way. He's already worked with business lawyers and slimy business types at the Office of Technology Development (Harvard's sell your science shop) to make sure the only pieces of pie given out are thimble sized.

I hope in earnest, not snarkiness, that the high dose (the amount you'd get by drinking 150-300 bottles of wine a day) of resveratrol he, his family, and his lab are taking are safe. I'm not just thinking of resveratrol itself, I'm also thinking of potential contaminants that can show up in unregulated supplements. Sinclair says he's being checked regularly by a doctor, but why take such a risk and why let those around you take such a risk?

It smells bad all the way around.