HOUSE CALL 001: Daisy Robinton, PhD
From ovarian aging to brand trust: why science is the through line.
If there’s one thing longevity has taught me, it’s that most breakthroughs don’t start in labs or boardrooms - they start in conversations. The kinds you have in a doctor’s office, at a dinner table, or on a walk with someone whose brain you can’t stop picking.
This series is a collection of those conversations: with people across science, culture, and everything in between. Some have changed the course of my life. Others have made me sharper. And some are simply with people I admire.
Welcome to House Call - and my first interview, with Daisy Robinton, PhD.
I first met Daisy Robinton, Phd through a mutual connection who had a hunch we’d get along. They were right. As we talked, the overlaps became obvious: shared mentors, parallel interests, and even a missed moment - she once appeared in an Equinox campaign during my time there, though somehow our paths never crossed.
Daisy is many things, including a women’s health expert and advocate, PhD-trained molecular biologist and a model who sat on Dior’s Scientific Advisory Board. She’s also the co-founder of Oviva Therapeutics, a biotechnology company created to improve and extend ovarian function and female healthspan, a technical advisor to XPRIZE, and a guest lecturer in UCLA’s Genetic Engineering in Medicine course to name a few. She brings both scientific rigor and cross-disciplinary creativity, effortlessly connecting the dots between seemingly different worlds.
We met for this conversation in her (non-literal) backyard: Manhattan Beach, where she lives with her fiancé and their three children - twin infants and a toddler. Sitting across from her, I couldn’t help but marvel: how does she do it all? A new mom, a biotech CEO, a women’s health advocate, a partner - and yes, a model with a seat at the table in shaping science at one of the world’s most iconic luxury houses.
At the core of it all is her natural curiosity: not just for biology, but for people. In this interview, we explore what she sees as one of the most overlooked frontiers in longevity: the ovaries.
J: Why did you enter this [women health] space?
D: Like many, through personal experience. I’m a molecular biologist by training. At 31, fresh out of a postdoc, newly single, wanting a family - I went to a reproductive endocrinologist. She said, “I know you have a PhD in human biology, but I always like to explain how the female body works.”
I thought I knew. I didn’t. Despite my degree, I’d never learned the fundamentals of my own biology. That shocked me.
Because I was consulting at the time, I dove deep - not just for work, but because I refused to stay ignorant about my body and future. That led me to menopause. I knew it existed, of course, but I didn’t understand or appreciate its broad and profound impact on health and aging. I was furious no one was talking about it, learning about it, or doing much about it at all.
With my background in aging biology, I began seeing the ovaries as a key organ that not only ages faster than others but drives accelerated aging in women during its decline. Everyone was talking about living to 150, yet after menopause, women age rapidly and suffer significant declines in quality of life. Ovaries felt like low-hanging fruit: they age early, influence so much, and remain poorly understood.
J: Can we actually slow ovarian aging, like a GLP-1 for ovaries?
D: I’m cautiously optimistic. Rapamycin is in trials. Within 10–15 years, I think we’ll see multiple strategies: therapeutics, cell engineering, gene therapy, lifestyle interventions. We already know smoking accelerates menopause – no surprise there - so we are able to take actions to influence the trajectory of ovarian decline. The question isn’t “can we?” but “when?” and “how far?”
“Borrowing the language of science is easy; building with it is harder.”
J: Today, is HT [hormonal therapy] the best tool?
D: Hormone therapy doesn’t delay menopause - it replaces one or two hormones that decline significantly as our ovaries age. It’s currently the best option to manage some symptoms, but not for slowing ovarian aging. It is a promising and powerful tool, and while the benefits largely outweigh the risks it is not appropriate for everyone and people should consult their doctor to weigh the risks versus benefits for their specific case.
While being a great tool, hormone therapy also replaces only a tiny fraction of the many hormones ovaries produce - most of which we still don’t fully understand - and does so non-cyclically, unlike a natural hormonal rhythm.
J: Is frequent, noninvasive hormone testing the barrier?
D: Exactly. Well, it is one of many. Continuous, noninvasive testing many relevant hormones does not exist. And we still don’t fully know all the hormones that would be worthwhile and meaningful to measure.
J: Has your work changed your personal life?
D: Basics matter most - movement, diet, sleep. I eat a fairly balanced diet, don’t drink alcohol or smoke, I exercise regularly, and sleep well when I’m not up with my newborn twins. Lifestyle is foundational.
Research shows pregnancy accelerates aging, but breastfeeding can reverse some effects. Postpartum, I think a lot about how breastfeeding supports my own healing too.
J: Any projects you’re excited about?
D: The development of high-resolution, continuous hormone monitoring that will give women more information and ability to understand and advocate for their own health. Also, research around preservation and restoration of hormonal function, for example a group in Michigan using encapsulated cadaver ovaries to restore hormonal function in animals.
J: Where do science, wellness, and brands intersect?
D: Consumers want to feel informed. Brands lean on “science” to build trust - but we’re also in an era of science-washing. A lab coat in an ad doesn’t mean a product works. Using marketing like ‘science-backed’ does not actually mean there were rigorous studies done to understand the mechanism behind a product or its efficacy and safety.
To that end, we need stronger partnerships with credible experts and better translation of science for the public - most people won’t read peer-reviewed studies and it would be crazy to expect everyday people to dig into the scientific literature on a granular level.
J: Biggest prediction for the next five years?
D: We’ll finally have cohesive datasets on female physiology - unlocking insights not just for women, but for men, too. Understanding the female body better will lead to paradigm shifts in human biology. We’ll see one or two major reversals of what we think we know about how bodies work.