Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40821382›Full record

ArticleThe Linacre quarterly2026

Personalist Bioethics as a Guide to Assessing Emerging Anti-aging Therapies.

Ana Rodríguez-Díaz, Esperanza Marín-Conde, Lucia Gómez-Tatay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Linacre quarterly, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ana Rodríguez-DíazInstitute of Life Sciences, Catholic University of Valencia "San Vicente Mártir," Valencia, Spain.
Esperanza Marín-CondeInstitute of Life Sciences, Catholic University of Valencia "San Vicente Mártir," Valencia, Spain.
Lucia Gómez-TatayInstitute of Life Sciences, Catholic University of Valencia "San Vicente Mártir," Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3478-9436

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last several years, the idea that aging is inevitable has been replaced by scientific evidence showing that it is rather a malleable process. In this article, the most relevant and promising therapies have been classified into three large groups, based on their possible bioethical implications: (1) nutritional interventions, (2) pharmacological interventions, and (3) gene therapies. After defining the mechanisms of action of each group of treatments, as well as the risks and benefits currently identified, we evaluated each group following guidelines for the ethical assessment of interventions on the human body. These are based on the principles of personalist bioethics, which has allowed us to discern the licitness of such practices. After performing the analysis, we concluded that, at present, only nutritional interventions can be considered acceptable as anti-aging therapies. Drugs and gene therapies are still at too early a stage of development and their application would endanger human life. Finally, some recommendations are proposed in the field of aging founded on health care, based on healthy dietary control that, in turn, allows us to embrace the frailty and weakness of human nature, which become more evident during old age.

Indexed as

Aginganti-aging therapiesbioethicsgene therapylongevitynutritional interventionspersonalismpharmacological interventions

Identifiers

PMID40821382
PMCPMC12354403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.