It uses the same technique used to turn revert normal cells back into their stem cell state. Beyond that, I'm not entirely sure on the details.

Telomeres were also just a theory, based off observations of older people who aged well, and other species. That long telomeres prevent the cell damages as they act like a sort of redundant absorption for mutations. However, much like the DNA damage theory, it had a lot of conflicting evidence that made direct correlation hard to prove... It's likely long telomeres are more likely a symptomatic correlation rather than causal.

Tumor suppression probably also exists within the epigenetic side of things as well. As we age, our bodies get worse and worse at fighting things off. They replicated this by artificially aging the mice which suddenly got more tumors. So as the epigenetics of the cells get more noisy, so does their ability to precisely work as intended, thus more tumors.

TL;DR:

For a while the leading hypothesis around aging had to do with DNA damage through a variety of different means. However, this hypothesis was always on shaky ground, because we couldn't find direct correlations when we look at other animals with even more severe damage at much younger ages. The correlation was just hard to find, even though the theory made sense.

However, this research is showing that it actually seems to be epigenetic "noise". Basically, with time as epigenetic "switches" turn on and off they kind of become less and less "useful". Basically a lot of noise in their performance code making their specific purpose less efficient as all these epigenetic changes start to pile up.

What this research shows is when you use similar techniques used to create stem cells, you can "reverse" the epigenetic age, effectively "restarting it" by telling them to return to their original state before all the epigenetic changes. Think of it like a computer being on for a week slowly just getting bogged down until you reset the computer and everything is running clean again.

When they did this in mice, they found age reversal. Further, when they did the opposite, by increasing the epigenetic noise in very young mice, suddenly the mice started resemble old mice (frail, low stamina, grey hair, weight loss, etc), which is further evidence that epigenetics are indeed playing a significant role in aging.

What's wild about this, that if this is true, this is a very solvable problem. It would take the problem of aging down from the rank of baffling enigma, to something we can solve because much of the science needed to do these reversals is pretty well developed and understood.

Trials are moving onto primates. If we get the same results as we expect, this is going to lay the groundwork in a massive paradigm shift putting age reversal literally within reach.

This is kind of stupid... It's like saying I made the world's first hybrid nuclear-hydro plant, by putting a nuclear plant next to the Hoover Dam.

They also missed the opportunity to make a phallic design, so they don't even get partial credit.

This tech is literally a more complicated and less powerful glow in the dark transparent paint. I read it and was massively disappointed to find out the plants are coated and don’t actually glow

If it has use, it will be commercialized. The problem is often these things in the lab show a proof of concept that "can maybe" do something great. But the moment that they show it has an advantage over the rest, it'll be miniaturized and fabricated. The problem is often they may have one unique strength, but it's not enough to outweigh what we already have.

The US was awarded it because Bill Clinton personally was lobbying for it, felt robbed, so he got them all thrown in jail. The USA got the World Cup to appease them.

The USA can produce it. The companies were found to be selling it under cost, which made no sense. Then found the pattern that all these below cost units were being placed near secured military and energy installations.

You have to realize it'll never be 1:1 the same. It's not possible. It's like drinking Sunny D and complaining that it's not as good as real orange juice. However, Sunny D is still a decent enough alternative that's cheap and tastes decent.

I think plant meat will go the same route if they can get it cheaper than meat. If it can adequately replace meat and be good enough, people will go towards it. Animal based meat will be seen as the better, but much more expensive version.

It’s wild to see that they managed to actually land, much less get a photo in those extreme temperatures

There are only a small amount of super expensive custom drugs available... It's probably not going to be until the end of the decade until we start seeing it more widespread.

We are moving into a corporate authoritarian libertarian style world.

Yes it’s literally a publication up for peer review. The whole point is replication.

In academia you often remove the authors to prevent bias. For instance, if you are peer reviewing Richard Dawkins on some biology submission, you’re just going to go “oh yeah this guy is the best in the world. I’m sure everything is done by the book.” And then approve it without much criticism.

The problem is, however, most of academia already kind of know what everyone is working on and the writing styles of the best, so it’s still kind of obvious who you’re peer reviewing. But it’s the best we got.

Gotchu

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSPhhw-2ShI

The one I'm thinking about was fully autonomous. You just set it and go to bed.

There is a company that does pesticide free automated removal of weeds during the early stages of plants. They are fully sold out for years in advance.