Talk:SRT-1720
Latest comment: 14 years ago by 74.9.55.102 in topic SRT1720 claim as an activator of SIRT1 has been refuted
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SRT-1720 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about SRT-1720.
|
SRT1720 claim as an activator of SIRT1 has been refuted
editPlease see Pfizer's well recieved peer reviewed journal article refuting Sirtris' claims. In a nutshell, 1. Apparent activation of the enzyme is shown clearly to be a "non-natural substrate specific" artifact of the assay system. 2. Animal study results could not be reproduced with severe adverse effects of the compounds noted at high doses.
[1]
Tom McDonagh