The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
what was found is that aside from age what was predictive of being able to basically stay alive was low inflammation like more than hematopoiesis more than glycated hemoglobin blood glucose levels lipid all that stuff it was basically the ability suppress inflammation like that was predictive of cognitive function and also basically staying alive
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.
So we know that it can be done with these supercentenarians, and we know that that there's a lot of genetic factors that are playing a role on this, I mean, obviously these people have lower inflammation compared to non-centenarians, they also showed that. And so, and inflammation is upstream of a lot of damage.
But what was really also interesting was that the centenarians, there was a positive correlation between inflammation and immunosenescence, which was essentially lost in the super centenarian group.
And what was identified was the only biomarker that was consistent with all the age groups was inflammation. So, lower inflammation was predictive of vitality, and cognitive function, and it was considered to be the only thing that was driving the aging process, or that could predict mortality aside from age itself.
And what was found, sort of to my surprise but not too much to my surprise, is that the only going to biomarker that was indicative of successful longevity in every cohort was suppression of inflammation.
And it was fun, it was interesting because the suppression of inflammation was the only thing that could predict going to the next age group or age...I don't know what it's called but transitioning to surviving to the next...right, just being able to like low inflammation basically.
The only thing that was able to predict whether or not someone was going to go from being an older adult to someone that lives to be 100 and someone that lives to be 100 to 105 and so on was suppressing inflammation. Nothing else predicted it. Not low blood glucose, not lipids, not kidney function, liver function. Nothing else predicted it except for the ability to suppress inflammation.