He does not sound legit to me. In Russian, his site and what is said there is called развод на деньги. Don't try to translate it through a dictionary. It means making up sleek appearances with aim of soliciting money from unsuspecting wide-eyed victims.
Here are some things that make no sense to me:
First, he repeatedly claims that aging and death are genetically programmed, and then goes on to fix this program with one tiny molecule, his ion.
Second, he fixes mitochondrial ROS production via a molecule that is more likely to harm mitochondria instead, by damaging their membranes. Here is why:
1. Small positively charged organic molecules, also called antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), are produced by all eukaryotes as part of their innate immunity. They kill bacteria by damaging their negatively charged membranes.
2. It is well-known that mitochondria arose hundreds of millions years ago from an engulfed bacterium, and one of the key similarities between bacteria and mitochondria is in the structure of their membranes.
3. It recently became known that, as a side effect, AMPs harm host mitochondria in a similar way as they harm invading microbes for whom they were intended, i.e. they depolarize, rupture and otherwise damage their membranes.
IMO, recycling mitochondria via mitophagy, a form of autophagy that specifically targets defective mitochondria, is what fixes the problem of damaged mitochondria known for their uncontrolled ROS production. Adding more positively charged molecules to the brew should only aggravate rather than fix the problem.
Based on all this, it is my belief that "Skulachev ions" act as antimicrobial peptides and it is their antimicrobial peoperties what may have some positive physiological effects, if any. I am willing to speculate that addition of these ions frees epithelial cells from the necessity to produce their own AMPs, much closer to their own mitochondria, which may affect them negatively (hehe, actually, those are positively charged ions but their effects on the mitochondrial membranes are negative... in non-chemical meaning... well, I'm sure you understand).
Edited by xEva, 17 January 2012 - 06:24 PM.