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.
there are people who claim there there are epigenetic signatures that do that that that that correlate quite well they claim with health outcome 10year mortality 5year mortality threeyear mortality in people and um are measuring the rate of biological aging because it's out there I mean it's in the literature
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.
people have published epigenetic algorithms denen pace is the one that most people are going to talk about right that that correlate seemingly pretty well at least with mortality and with metrics of Health span to for lack of a better way of framing it
Whereas the epigenetic clocks are meant to capture more this biological molecular cellular aging that we think will, eventually, feed into that. So, if you can say, "Oh, you're aging faster at a molecular level than we'd expect. We'll also expect you, down the road, probably to have these functional manifestations earlier, even if we can't see them yet."