New study out of China tested 5 compounds; 2 “significantly diminished the predicted age.” - In vitro

From the video description;

"A new study out of China has tested 5 different compounds and found that 2 of them did actually, as they say in the paper “significantly diminished the predicted age.”

Another age measuring test.

Links to the published paper are at the bottom/end of the video description.


And the two are… I don’t mind spoilers. Lol.


6:03 NMN and Metformin.

To be expected. The poster’s youtube channel is My NMN Experiment He, and Richard and wife of Modern Healthspan channel have had good results with NMN.

Did squat for me. I attribute that to individual responses to supplements. Still have some of my NMN from Alive By Science. Will start taking again, just to finish the stack, to give the supplement due process. Actually, appeal, because my two month taking produced no discernible benefits.


The more interesting point is the “new testing” method used. This 'new testing can be applicable to many substances/molecules

Thanks for the video. This is the first time I have heard of the lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio as a predictor of aging. ( 4:53 in the video)

Theoretically, a lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio (less than .8) is considered low thereby indicating faster aging.

My current ratio is 1.95 after 1 year on rapamycin.
Just before I started taking rapamycin it was 2.2

Still, another disappointment from taking rapamycin.

Rapamycin has not improved anything that I can detect on the common aging clocks such as the Levine, etc.

If this lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio is a predictor it is still another indicator for me that rapamycin is not actually slowing the aging process as indicated by any of the standard tests.

Note: As I have previously posted I have received many benefits from rapamycin, but slowing the aging clock does not seem to be one of them.


After further study of my historical records, I find this ratio to be very questionable, at least for me, as this ratio has varied wildly from test to test.


It would be nice if we had a biological age clock that worked for everyone. Unfortunately, we don’t and it seems we are a long ways off from having a good one. The best ‘clock’ that works for me is the ITP results. So, I am going with Rapamycin and other supplements based on that. Although, it does help my peace of mind that Rapamycin did reduce my epigenetic age by 7 years according to my spit test.

If you can get all of the biological age clocks to line up and give you similar results, I would say this is a good thing. But as far as I can tell some clocks say you are younger, while others might say you are older. I guess they look at different factors, and if you are ‘older’ on one clock it may point to a specific problem that that clock is analyzing.

This newest clock appears to be looking primarily at inflammation, which is probably something you want to keep an eye on.


I don’t think this is a very good study… all it is is a blood analysis of a transcriptome clock that showed some changes in groups taking nmn and metformin. Its not like they followed the people in a longitudinal study for X number of years and mapped these changes to some proven beneficial longevity outcome.

I think this guy has fallen in love with NMN due to David Sinclair’s propaganda and now has a confirmation bias so that whenever he sees some positive news on NMN he feels he has to cover it.

NR (which is very similar to NMN) failed the ITP program (did not improve lifespan), so I really doubt any of these NAD promoters do much. Metformin has lots of better studies out - with mixed results.

@joseph Please don’t post videos by random youtubers when it comes to paper reviews. I think we all gain more when we hear from the actual researchers, especially the ones who are leaders in the field. …



I posted this as it reminded me of the testing developed by Nagourney for cancer treatment.

Short story, take a person’s cancer tissue a live sample. Grow in vitro culture and test against a plethora of agents, reporting what worked and did not work in vitro sample. Then decide to on which to use.

This paper/presentation, my view/idea/vision;

Take your own blood sample, grow a live culture and test against “anti-aging” agents/compound’s/molecule’s to see which changes do or do not change your personal blood sample. Then decide which to try/use.

*which- meaning, agents/compound’s/molecule’s


When Nagourney developed his testing method at the NIH{over 2 decade’s ago] they{the NIH] discounted it.

He left the NIH, started his own testing base company based on what he developed.

Look up Nagourney today.

No longer “discounted”.