We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
when i look at those data i'm not remotely impressed and by the way i've done the experiments on some of my patients right you you know you measure their epigenetic age on day zero they do a three day fast you measure their epigenetic age it goes down by 10 percent or more frankly have you really learned anything and then a week later it's back to normal like i i that i don't know what that's telling me
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
they ranged from um 42 to 63 I was like 53.7 years at the time I did the test um and the standard deviation I can't remember it was either seven or nine so mean of my chronological age standard deviation of seven or nine um uh which you know I look at that data I'm not a statistician but I know enough statistics to say that's completely useless
I I got one of these a epigenetic age clocks done on me a while ago but I didn't know what to make out of it you know I thought is this just flattery am I I want to do this so it's or did it really tell me something he must have got a good result if he thought it was flattery huh he must have got a good result if he thought it was but you know that's uh that may be the point of the whole thing right so I'm I'm I'm dubious about some number uh that is different than I know I'm in good health
the individual replicates was 20 years apart so to meet and and and some people will say but but maybe you know the true diagnostic test is great and the alysium test is terrible or the tally Health test is terrible and the other one is great maybe but how do we know so so my sort of take-home is that the direct to Consumer biological age testing industry is a complete mess and I have no idea who to believe or if any of them are actually giving accurate data
I think these are really good research tools I think the direct to Consumer component has gotten way ahead of itself and I think I align with what you were saying about the way you think about these test is I I don't think there's a lot of value in clinical practice right now because we don't know we don't know Precision or accuracy and I don't think you can make actionable recommendations based on these tests