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.
i think really what you're asking though is can i convince you that the epigenetic clocks and potentially other types of clocks are actually measuring biological aging correct and that's a harder in my mind that's a harder thing to prove and personally i have no interest in convincing you of that because i'm not convinced right
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.
I got one of these a epigenetic age clocks done on me a while ago but I didn't know what to make out of it you know I thought is this just flattery am I just I want to do this so it's or did it really tell me something got a good result if he thought it was flattery huh you must have got a good result if he thought it was FL but years you know that's uh that may be the point of the whole thing right so I'm I'm I'm dubious about some number uh that is different than I know I'm in good health you know for my age I'm in very good health so I knew that already now I have a number for I don't put much Credence in that
But at the end of the day, I don't believe that there's a single bloodbased biomarker that you can look at and it can predict future years of life very well.