Anyone taking calcium alpha-ketoglutarate (AKG)?

Harvard professor David Sinclair is raving on twitter about the results of a clinical trial involving a supplement with calcium alpha glutamate that claims to have reversed the epigenetic clock by eight years. There is no reason to take this brand, which paid for the study which by the way had no controls so is worthless. Here is the study:

If you are interested, there is an interesting podcast with Gordon Lithgow, the scientist behind the research (though not the supplement company).

Lithgow’s paper is here


Thanks for the heads up about the paper. Just to clarify it’s calcium alpha-glutarate (not glutaMate). The study was retrospective and had no placebo group and the aging markers aren’t perfect, but it’s still intriguing!


Suggestive, but not worth acting on since it is a small and not well-controlled study. If you don’t want to buy the name-brand, they tell you the two ingredients: CaAKG and either Vitamin A (men) or Vitamin D (women), and it’s unclear if you need to supplement the vitamins. They took the equivalent of 1g of AKG twice a day. Also, AAKG may do just as well, since the AKG portion probably is having the effect, not the calcium or alanine. Based on molecular mass, AKG is about 30% of AAKG, so 3.33g of AAKG is 1g AKG.

1 Like

I’ve used both the rejuvant and the regular Ca-AKG powder. Don’t notice any difference. I used them perhaps for 6 months in the past year. I’m skeptical of the biomarker testing - because there is no deep data on how the biomarkers translate to functional outcomes - so nobody knows how accurate the are. Perhaps the company just Biomarker Shopped until they found one with a good result.

Here is Sinclair’s tweet:


Interesting podcast too. There’s an off-brand on Amazon that’s only $18 for a month supply, so I figure I’ll give it a shot. RapAdmin, did you take it on an empty stomach?

I imagine the Calcium-bound form has a lot more AKG per weight, since calcium is a tiny atom compared to the arginine molecule.


No - I typically take supplements after a meal.

I think it’s supposed to be taken on an empty stomach for effective absorption, but I haven’t verified this.

1 Like

I think Brian Kennedy also said it has a very short half life - so you want to take it a few times a day ideally (if its not the Rejuvant, time-release version). Not sure which video he stated it in:


Have you tried to use any of the Horvath clocks for testing? see:

Not sure I’d want to see the death clock…butthe others sound interesting

1 Like

No - I don’t think they are ready for prime time. I’m all about cost-effectiveness. The extra value added for a given product, for the cost. I can do a Levine Phenotypic biological age calculation based on some simple blood measures - and its free, and extremely close in accuracy (say tests so far) to any of the epigenetic clocks.

Also - the physicians and experts are saying this too. In the Peter Attia / Matt Kaeberlein podcast they discussed this:

Epigenetic clocks

  • Peter doesn’t think epigenetic clocks are useful either because they can easily be manipulated by short-term interventions that don’t seem biologically relevant

  • Can we develop epigenetic clocks that will, in a predictive way, tell you how old you are biologically?

    • Some companies are selling these tests right now
    • Human tests are based on markers in the blood, but it’s not clear whether the “biological age” of the blood reflects the biological age of the entire body
    • They are mostly looking at peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and maybe saliva tests, but Matt’s not sure how the commercial companies are doing it
  • Peter discounts clocks that use inputs like glucose or vitamin D level, because they vary widely from day to day and are easy to manipulate

  • Matt thinks the data and correlations of epigenetic clocks are strong

    • But he’s skeptical that there are so many data points in the epigenome that you can find a pattern that will fit pretty much anything you look for
    • It may not be a robust predictor of biological age, but they are telling us something
  • Matt says that people are now “going beyond the epigenetic clocks to try to look at every possible thing you could measure, sometimes combining that with the epigenetic clock to build these multi-element clocks”

    • Now you have tens of thousands of additional data points, which makes it more likely you can find a pattern
    • We’re not yet at the point of getting to biological explanations for what the patterns are telling us
    • Are the genes at the mark locations causal for biological aging in any way? We’d need to understand the mechanism to know

Discussion (video cued up at the exact start of this discussion) Here:


There is a good overview of the Biomarkers / Epigenetic Bio Clocks by Mike Lustgarten here in the video below. The Levine calculation (something you can easily do in your spreadsheet at home for zero cost) is almost as good as these epigenetic clocks that cost $300 - so I’ll go with my cheap, easy and almost as accurate approach.

The excel file / spreadsheet that Mike created based on the Levine Phenotypic Clock paper is available for your download here. See the file halfway down the file called " or you can click here: DNAmPhenoAge_gen


It’s not free but another option is an AI program created by the rocket scientist at Nature, Balance Thrive. For $198 their tests your blood for 40 biomarkers and tells you your biological age. Using AI it also compares your results to thousands of others and makes recommendations for supplements or other things based on what it considers optimum outcomes.


Another one I use that is free is the website. Just plug in your blood test results.

you need to at least get the standard CBC like the one that Life Extension offers plus the C Reactive Protein measure - typical total cost about $70 I think.

Also - here is an overview of how Mike Lustgarten uses the Levine Phenotypic age calculations to track his progress.

I’ve adopted his approach - and do blood tests every few months to track my progress.


At some point some indecent group needs to do regular comparisons of all these biological age calculation approaches, and do long term studies to see how they map to functional outcomes and actual lifespans. They are not too valuable yet I don’t think - other than to measure some sort of relative progress - how you are doing now compared to how you were doing 6 months ago…


I should have noted that the price of the INCLUDES the actual blood test. Also, the epigenetic calculator you posted has some odd measurements not included in the usual package I buy on, like alkaline phosphatase.


One I do recommend is an arterial plaque measurement using ultrasound in your carotid artery. Although everyone, including Peter Attia, says you only need one calcium score in your life because it can’t be changed, this doctor did it and explains how, so a regular test might be worth it. Interestingly, all of his supplements apart from Niacin are on Mikhail Blagosklonny’s list of anti-aging drugs.


The 3.0 version of the test is the one I use - it has the fewest requirements.

  • 19 input parameters
  • r = 0.80
  • Rsq = 0.65
  • MAE = 5.90 years
1 Like

link to off brand you refer to?


Calcium AKG Longevity (Alpha Ketoglutarate) (1,000 mg per 2 Capsule Serving, 60 Capsules) by ProHealth Longevity. Supports Cellular Energy, Metabolic Function and Healthy Aging Processes.

1 Like

I may be wrong, but I thought this was the cheapest on a per gram basis:

1 Like