David Sinclair· PhD
Biological age, as measured via DNA methylation patterns, can differ from chronological age by 20 years, typically in individuals who live much longer than average — Steve Horvath (2013)
Loading…
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.
Biological age, as measured via DNA methylation patterns, can differ from chronological age by 20 years, typically in individuals who live much longer than average — Steve Horvath (2013)
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.
it's clear that you can create algorithms that can predict specific methylation patterns that that are more highly correlated with life expectancy than remain than chronological age
it's clear that you can create algorithms that can predict specific methylation patterns that that are more highly correlated with life expectancy than remain than chronological age
so if you analyze the blood for from a centenarian or super centenarian it's through our age estimates are really way below their chronologic ages could be 15 years younger you know