Direct evidence is thin. The claim is plausible and aligns with adjacent findings, but there isn't yet a body of high-quality work that would let us call it well-supported on its own terms.
So, do you think biologic clocks will ever serve a purpose like that where I could um take two 50 year olds and one of them has a biologic age of 40 and one of them has a biologic age of 60 according to the clock and that those numbers will actually be better at predicting future life than their chronologic age of 50?
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.