Bryan Johnson, Is he the New Poster Child for Rapamycin Use?

Ah yes - thats a brain fart. he also mixed up quercetin and dasatinib… his brain isn’t working like a 20 year old’s :wink:


I have been taking it without a statin or other cholesterol drug. But I do also take Cholestoff+ and sometimes the Benecol chews. Both work by absorbing cholesterol in the intestines – similar to what Ezitimibe does, but by a somewhat different pathway so effects are additive. These have taken me from not-so-good to good but I am probably going to add some Bempedoic Acid to get even better.


My little wifey :slight_smile:


Hanna is not the one who creates the tests :slight_smile: while her approach to the public is more fluffy, that does not mean the company is not hardcore in epigenetic research and is very collaborative with the leaders in this field.

Trudiagnostic collaborates with scientists at Yale, Harvard, etc and is well respected in their niche of epigenetic DNA methylation testing.

They consistently push the envelope and add new “tests” to their offerings.

  • Dunedinpace - Developed by Belsky and colleagues at Duke University and the University of Otago

  • OmicAge - Harvards Dr. Lasky-Su and TruDiagnostic researchers did a full, multi-omic analysis, an integrative multi-omics approach to quantify biological age with electronic medical records

  • SymphonyAGE - Yale University, with development spearheaded by epigenetic pioneer Dr.Morgan Levine to create SymphonyAGE to measure the age of 11 organs



See also: WSJ: Think You Will Live to 100? These Scientists Think You’re Wrong


I get the whole longevity debate and I think it is a good debate and good that it is making headlines.

The more people who are aware and thinking about it and asking questions about it the better.

Yes there will be a lot of woo brought to the average consumers attention. That is unavoidable in any hot new “thing” that has the potential for significant revenue.

I’ve stated a few times that I don’t care about longevity, it’s not why I’m interested in this space. Why? because of my 3 fundamentals;

  1. is there enough evidence the “thing” works?
  2. can I do it now? - availability, cost, convenience, safety
  3. if I can’t do it now I move on to what I can do.

My 3 fundamentals are driven by my age :slight_smile: the clock is ticking and I have an issue with clocks, used to be with the analogues, 3 hands going in never ending circles, lying to me that life is never ending, then with digital, more never ending numbers.

I feel we should all have an hourglass in our chest so we can see the limited sands of time dropping until the end. That helps me prioritize the important things, early on a career and young family, lots of sand in the bank, midway time to focus on different things, nearing the end, hurry up and GSD!!

I’m not concerned about life span, I am concerned about health span and I believe health span (with what we have today) leads to life span. So I try not to get distracted by the things I can’t do anything about and get on with doing.


It would be interesting to identify the types of diets that the top 20 competitors in the rejuvenation olympics abide by (rough classifications, not extreme details). It seems like many are vegan or mostly vegetarian - but that may be just the ones talking about their diets.


Does this competition consider your improvement from baseline or just your current numbers. Meaning, did they test when starting their protocols and therefore it shows they are working, or if not, perhaps some of the people on the list have simply won genetic lottery ?

Knowing their diets would be quite interesting

1 Like

How many of the top 20 take rapamycin? If rapamycin (plus acarbose) is the best readily available longevity booster we have, wouldn’t you expect it to give you a headstart in the rejuvenation olympics?


My wife and I are not super diet oriented. She is # 16 on the leader board, I will be much further down when my data gets added.

We do try to avoid processed foods and unnecessary carbs but we are both dedicated meat eaters :slight_smile: fish, chicken, pork, lamb, beef. We eat fruit and veggies, some dairy products, cheese, grass fed butter, yogurt, ice cream once a week or so. Some fermented foods like sauerkraut as you can see, not much of a focus on diet.


The data used is the DunedinPace results from a Trudiagnostic test. To get a blue check you need to have at least 3 tests within 2 years. You can enter with only 1 test but you won’t get the blue check and probably won’t be in the top tier of participants until you have done enough tests to be statistically relevant.

You do not submit your own data, you submit a bar code that is issued for one of your tests and the leader board is populated by direct access to your results so there is no fudging of the data by any of the participants.

You will see 2 results for each participant with a blue check, an average of the last 3 tests and your best test result.

Since Joan’s results have been improving the last 3 tests, if her next test is as good as or better than the last one, she may move up the leader board :slight_smile: end of September we should see her new data.


And I’d like to know their age. Simm Land the leader is 29 (correction from ng0rge), Bryan J is 46, most who are ahead of Joan are younger. Theoretically it should be easier to score higher (in the RO rankings) the younger you are, with similar interventions. A questionable assumption by me :slight_smile:

Fewer of the 12 Hallmarks of Aging would be at play for a 30 y/o vs a 67 y/o.

Anyone want to contribute ages they find, let me know and I’ll add to the list :slight_smile:

Simm Land - 29
Ben Greenfield - 43
Bryan Johnson - 46
Dave Pascoe - 62


Reddit says “Dave Pascoe is 62 and ages slower than Bryan. Then there is 29 year old Siim Land.”( and Siim Land says in his video 6 weeks ago, he’s 28).

But, interesting point on whether younger age gives you an advantage…just based on DunedinPace rate of aging score, I assume it’s adjusted for chronological age. Otherwise your rate of aging would be expected to increase with the build up of cellular damage and breakdown of homeostasis. But as you point out, it may be easier to slow your rate of aging with interventions when you are younger and your body is more responsive. Are there scientific studies that show this? Most ages for the leaderboard are probably out there, I just haven’t searched them all.

Edit: Here’s 2 more - Julie Gibson Clark, 55 and Amy Hardison, 64 (as of 5/21/2024)

And, of course, Michael Lustgarten, 51 and John Hemming, 64.

This says that Jenvel Earth is 29 - Jenvel Earth's longevity blueprint: reversing ageing at 29 with a biological age of 21

And here’s an interesting one - Tiat Lim at #10 - this says he’s 52.
And here’s his very entertaining challenge to Bryan Johnson:!AuCajgI7C6hDl6Vp7R7uCsmBTsK9QQ?e=3Yrtm6

And an article covering the whole top 10:


His words ring so true.

I’ve always loved myself. But societal structures and pressures (office politics) pose the biggest threat to my happiness.

I disagree with Bryan about divorce. I am a much happier man thanks to my wife and sons.


You can have a look at : Normalizing the TruDiagnostic DunedinPace rate of aging by age


Yes, I’ve been following that thread but not sure I understand the chart. For Bryan Johnson, on the chart using the closest numbers, you get .68. Now, what does .68 represent - compared to his rate of aging, .64?
What do the numbers across the top of the chart represent?

I posted another way of looking at the age compensation/normalization in the original thread: Normalizing the TruDiagnostic DunedinPace rate of aging by age - #8 by cl-user

Tell me if it’s more understandable.
Anyway when compensated for age Dave Pascoe has a better rate of aging than Bryan Johnson and Simm Land is third.

BTW I think TruDiagnostics should normalize by age otherwise most of the top ranks will be taken by people in there 20’s.


It’s hard to believe that they wouldn’t normalize by age as part of their algorythm. Has TruDiagnostics confirmed that your analysis is correct?

1 Like

I’m using their data below. If they were normalizing by age, the best fit line would be horizontal.