Our latest manuscript is finally out in @NatureSMB! Here, we show that the GAP activity of SEAC (GATOR) acts as a molecular switch, regulating both inhibition and reactivation of TORC1 upon changes in amino acid levels. nature.com/articles/s41594-0…

Why do muscle fibres shrink with age? Not because myofibrils get smaller — because there are fewer of them. We followed this from whole-muscle down to individual myofibrils, in humans and mice, across ageing and disuse. Tweetorial below Open Access here: physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.c…

Finally a more intuitive way to learn pLDDT/pAE? 😎 sokrypton.github.io/protein_… (Character idea from @HannesStaerk & Alex Waldherr)

CICO 🥴

This is legitimately terrible for OpenAI --- but also Anthropic --- and it relates to their work in drug discovery. I read this as: prompts will be monitored and potentially acted on if we think there’s something scientifically and/or commercially valuable being disclosed. Now, the big problem for Anthropic is that they are increasingly seen to be competing with their customers. Outside of SF, many people also think of OpenAI/ChatGPT and Anthropic/Claude as somewhat interchangeable companies and products --- aka, if OpenAI do something, surely Anthropic will do it too? As so much IP relates to drug targets and people disclose these to Claude, I think we will see a lot of pharma companies stop using these tools or put up a lot of internal guardrails.

Vegan diet = highly increased risk of fraility, particularly for older adults.

Luckily we are in 2026 and people are not afraid to call BS on things like this anymore.

Guys we need to get serious here: The new paper barely nudges our priors on GLP-1 for longevity. I'm spending every waking moment pushing for progress on longevity, but what's going to get us there is scaling up truth-seeking, not giving in to slopulism. Publishing this in Nature is IMO a failure of human taste and judgement. First, the sema mice don't really live longer than healthy controls in other studies (see pic). If you stop there, this should be seen as 'nice someone did this, now do it more carefully'. This may be robust life extension it may not. Second, we already know reduced food intake extends mouse lifespan. Why is there are whole figure comparing CR and sema effects, but no lifespan for matched food-intake? Because it should turn paper into 'sema reduces mouse food intake' If you want to keep going, why females only? Blah blah male aggression, that doesn't stop various ITP interventions from working in males. Or is it that constant injections shorten lifespan, possibly via ulcerative dermatitis which is more common in females? No non-injected control group, can 't say. Fig 3 "GLP-1 ... alleviates the hallmarks of ageing and mimics the calorie restriction response" yes reducing food intake is similar to reducing food intake. Fig 4 "modulates the genetic regulators of ageing" -> Show a bunch target genes many of which have been tested and don't nudge lifespan. I'm glad someone did this study, I'm not saying it's not a contribution or should be retracted, but the reason this is in a tier 1 journal is because it'll get attention (boosted by hypefluencers). Apparently some journals are just giving up; I understand that the multi-year assault on truth-seeking is really hard, it's hard to imagine journals not getting replaced by AI if they lean into slopulism.

New paper in @MolecularCell! A great collaborative effort to uncover how the lncRNA CONCR works. Terrific teamwork with the labs of @MaiteHuarteLab @OscarLlorcaCNIO @ChillonIsabel and supported by @FundlaCaixa cell.com/molecular-cell/full…

Un conflicto de interés de enormes dimensiones acaba de ser descubierto: un cardiólogo presidente de la sociedad europea promovió y recomendó el uso de un medicamento sobre el cual existen dudas de su seguridad y eficacia, y recibió 50M£, via @bmj_latest bmj.com/content/394/bmj-2026…

😳

Can confirm this!

Exactly my experience. Many mistakes are made. AI agents replace only a quick web search, not in depth review of the literature.

Probably the most uninformative figure ever created

A tool used to rephrase plagiarised text changed "final solution" to "mass killing of an ethnic group" in a chemistry paper. Now retracted thanks to a PubPeer user who spotted this.

Excellent example of treating numbers and molecules but not causes. This the main problem with modern biomedicine.

Good luck getting frail, fragile and weak.

Our latest work is now out! Congratulations to the whole team on this publication. Happy reading!

Amidst all this discussion of the COVID origin docs released recently by the Senate committee, I remain dumbfounded by the CONTINUED lack of interest of the scientific community into where this pandemic came from. Whatever you think about the motivations of the people who wrote the Proximal Origins paper (and the documents certainly call those into question), the effect of this on the scientific community writ large was to signal that the official stance was "natural origin" and that any questioning of that claim, let alone investigations into it, were anti-science conspiracy theories. I'm hardly a lab leak proponent - I've said all along that my prior was natural origins, although that's shifted a bit with subsequence disclosures - but it was really quite ugly how even being publicly open to the possibility of lab leak was treated as an apostasy - despite the fact that many scientists agreed in private. I hope scientists - especially those with political or other influence - will reflect on this and when called upon to discuss scientific issues of great public import will place far less emphasis on "controlling the narrative" and instead will emphasize protecting public inquiry and being personally open minded.

Behind closed doors, the scientists who authored the Proximal Origin paper privately questioned their own conclusions. Publicly, however, they shamed, attacked, and censored those who raised legitimate questions—all in the name of damage control.