I would trust your instincts on this guy.

Science has known for years that the fewer calories you ingest, the slower you age. Metabolic processes induce a lot of wear and tear.

As far as reversing aging, the protein thing may have some merit, but I would remain skeptical for now. My 2-cent guess is that truly reversing aging will involve some unholy cocktail recipe of stem cells, genetic manipulation using CRISPR, lots of fasting, and maybe some advanced vaccines (we're learning vaccines can train the immune system to do all sorts of interesting things beyond fighting infections).

Sinclair has a well earned reputation as a charlatan.

Sinclair is ok. He wrote a book called "lifespan" that's pretty well regarded. Also look up Aubrey de Grey. His book, Ending Aging, is also good. He himself is problematic though. If you're interested in this sort of tech, also look up the SENS foundation (I donate there).

Fair warning, most everything focuses on increasing healthspan, not lifespan. I.e. Being able to be active and alert at 90. There's no way for tech to guarantee an increase in lifespan within our lives, because we would need a few generations of evidence to guarantee that. So at most you'll get partial evidence and animal models. But you gotta start somewhere. And if we're lucky, we'll stop be around for the 'proof' in 200 years :-)

David Sinclair is an interesting person. I've seen him present his research in a professional setting and he does some really interesting science. He is also very enthusiastic at selling his story.

There's likely no amount of supplement and drug cocktails that will undo the damage of a sedentary lifestyle and poor diet. Best case scenario is this research could be on to something that significantly augments a healthy lifestyle, or worse case it could be wasting a lot of money on something that potentially ends up being harmful a few decades from now.

I've looked at the list of supplements and drugs Dr. Sinclair takes and there is mechanistic rationale from cell culture and animal experiments behind the ones I'm most familiar with. But it is a big leap to go from cell culture and animal models to human health on a much longer time span. The clinical trials needed to really demonstrate a lot of these claims are incredibly expensive and would take decades. Drug companies in the anti-aging field tend to focus on older patients to start with and earlier endpoints like lower cancer, Alzheimer's, or heart disease incidence. They also tend to be funded by silicon valley tech executives.

Sinclair and Dr Stanfield ( https://www.youtube.com/@DrBradStanfield ) don't always agree on things.

@UraniumBlazer
To solve reverse aging, we first need to understand how to stop it first.

Should we hope to get drugs/treatment to cure this in the next 10/30/50 years?

I sure hope not. What a shit show that would be. People need to die, it's just part of life. Assuming it would even be possible, don't think for a second us normies would be eligible. This would be for Trump, Musk, Bezos, etc. I couldn't imagine how it would impact resources and population overtime.