First hint that body’s ‘biological age’ can be reversed

First hint that body’s ‘biological age’ can be reversed

05 September 2019


Yes. Very intriguing. TRIIM2 clinical study is in process with larger sample size.

The study{TRIM2], I read somewhere it is subject funded. You pay to be in the study. The cost is several thousand a month.



Greg Fahy, Intervene Immune | Thymus Rejuvenation Progress Update


Participants had a 2.5 years reversal.

Meh! At one time that would have seemed amazing. But…

On Rapamycin and Metformin I have a 14 years reversal using TruMe test. And 27 years reversal looking at GlycanAge results.

Rapamycin … talk is talk the proof is in the pudding.


The Agetron protocol!

"Nothing else is even close."™


How do we know that “epigenetic age reversal” is not due to changes in cell type composition (ie expansion of the naive T cell pool). See Eric Verdin latest presentation (he produced a new epigenetic age test whose CpGs are nearly ALL independent/divorced from all the other epigenetic tests…)

What data/CpG sites does TruMe even use? Reductions in epigenetic age that drastic are very rare.

GlycanAge is imcomparable to epigenetic age testing.

I find these age tests very suspect.

1 Like

Yes, I would agree in general too. But, GlycanAge is used by those involved in the PEARL Clinical study for Rapamycin - the best in the field and TruMe CEO Yelena Budovskaya, PhD - Stanford Molecular Biologist is very reputable among the aging researchers. They put their career reputation on their tests… .so maybe a bit better than the rest. Definitely gives me more confidence.

GlycanAge measures SOMETHING “bad” that is definitely correlated with age, simple enough to be verified/re-verified on objective criteria, and that responds to anti-aging interventions (and where there aren’t many super-outliers) but the use of “age” still gives very misleading interpretations. In some people it can be drastically reduced with drugs (but that still does not reduce/eliminate all their historical age-accumulated damage). “Age reduction” is higher on the more malleable tests that don’t necessarily reveal true age inasmuch as they just reveal that a lot of the Western population is very unhealthy on that metric

It also correlates (almost not at all) with epigenetic aging.

It still does surprisingly well, perhaps b/c it measures the “remaining complexity” that the cell can still synthesize (complexity is SO easy to get disrupted with age in SO many ways)

The best aging clocks have to still show something that changes over time even in those who practice CRON or super-healthy diets.

but it’s not A catalogue of omics biological ageing clocks reveals substantial commonality and associations with disease risk - PMC


I don’t see any evidence that these aging clocks are any better than the Aging.Ai clocks that are based on data from a huge database and artificial intelligence.