The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
so if i for example when i analyzed breast malignant breast tissue samples from women with so-called luminal breast cancer the epigenetic age acceleration is off the chart so their breast tissue is much older than expected
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.
problem is this association is weak you know you you need really a couple of thousand people to observe it
the exciting insight is that yes blood methylation data indicate that blood samples collected before the person developed cancer show a slight epigenetic age acceleration so that supports the view that faster epigenetic aging is predictive of future onset of cancer and that finding has been validated by many groups