I’m 56 years old chronologically and am recently retired from my public sector job. I have access to money so decided to do a New Year splurge on getting my biological age estimated.
The InsideTracker result has arrived back to me. It was based on around ten commonly done blood test results, BMI and % body fat etc. Apparently I’m 62 on the inside according to that result. It seems reasonable given that my whole life has been somewhat stressful.
Got the second result back and this time from mydnage.com. It says my DNA shows I’m 60 on the inside. This one is based on an Extended Horvath DNA clock which measures epigenetic methylation. The company and measurement method are both completely different from the Inside Tracker method used in the first result above.
I have a set of electronic scales which measure weight, muscle ratio, bone weight, bmi, etc and ages me at 49 when I am 48. I’m pleased with the result considering the meds.
My electronic scales measured % body fat as 25% a week before I got a DEXA scan done. The DEXA said it was 32%. DEXA is accurate to the gram, and it was done as part of a research project.
I’m expecting the Glycanage test result in the next week or so. Bumping the thread so that it won’t be closed before I post the result. The Glycanage.com test is purported to reflect long term history of inflammation in the immune system and is more a reflection of lifestyle than the mydnage or insidetracker results. I’m open to correction on that, but that’s my understanding so far. I’ve lived a reasonably healthy life, though not obsessively so.
‘Reversal of Epigenetic Age with Diet and Lifestyle in a Pilot Randomized Clinical
Trial’
SUMMARY
Manipulations to set back biological age and extend lifespan in animal models are well established, and translation to humans has begun. The length of human life makes it impractical to evaluate results by plotting mortality curves, so surrogate markers of age have been suggested and, at present, the best established surrogates are DNA methylation clocks. Herein we report on a randomized, controlled clinicaltrial designed to be a first step in evaluating the effect of a diet and lifestyle intervention on biological age. Compared to participants in the control group (n=20), participants in the treatment group tested an average 3.23 years younger at the end of the eight-week program according to the Horvath DNAmAge clock (p=0.018). Those in the treatment group (n=18) tested an average 1.96 years younger at the end of the program compared to the same individuals at the beginning with a strong trend towards significance (p=0.066 for within group change). This is the first such trial to demonstrate a potential reversal of biological age. In this study, the intervention was confined to diet and lifestyle changes previously identified as safe to use. The prescribed program included multiple components with documented mechanistic activity on epigenetic pathways, including moderate exercise, breathing exercises for stress, and a diet rich in methyl donor nutrients and polyphenols.
