Living longer and staying healthy are different goals. Lifespan counts the total years lived; healthspan concerns the years spent in reasonably good health, active and independent. Writing for Your Local Epidemiologist, Anna Chodos, a geriatrician who specialises in caring for older adults, argues that preserving health and independence is a more useful aim than pursuing dramatic promises of longer life. Your Local Epidemiologist (source, opens in new tab)
Your Local EpidemiologistForget living to 150: What actually helps you age wellOpen source (opens in new tab)
Biological-age tests can seem to offer a way to track progress. They estimate aspects of how the body is ageing, but a consumer result is neither a diagnosis nor a definitive prediction of how long someone will live. A change in the score does not, by itself, demonstrate an improvement in health. Stanford Medicine (source, opens in new tab)
Stanford MedicineBiological age versus chronological age: What the science saysOpen source (opens in new tab)
The practical priorities for ageing well include physical and social activity, nutritious food, sleep and screening for hearing loss. These recommendations focus on maintaining health and everyday function; they do not amount to proof that ageing can be reversed or a longer life guaranteed.
The tests themselves help explain why a score needs careful interpretation. Some use measurements from blood, others DNA patterns or vital signs. There is no single accepted standard, and different tests may capture different aspects of biology. Results can also contain measurement error. An apparently precise age therefore should not be read as a precise verdict on someone’s health.
Research use is also different from medical diagnosis. Tests that help scientists investigate ageing are not automatically suitable for assessing an individual’s health. Stanford Medicine reports that biological-age clocks sold directly to consumers are not approved as medical diagnostic tools by the US Food and Drug Administration.
The same distinction between promise and demonstrated benefit applies to longevity products. Findings in animals do not establish benefits in people, and limited or mixed human findings are different from established benefits.
A longevity product should be judged by evidence that it helps people stay healthy, remain independent or live longer. A lower biological-age score alone does not demonstrate any of those benefits.
- Your Local EpidemiologistForget living to 150: What actually helps you age wellyourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com · opens in new tab
- Stanford Medicine · InstitutionBiological age versus chronological age: What the science saysmed.stanford.edu · opens in new tab
