My chronological age is 61, but am I an oldish 61 or a youngish 61? A few weeks ago, I wrote about Index and how it determines biological age by measuring DNA methylation. You can read more about the test, and the science behind it here. The question we all want to know is, how fast have we really been aging? Well, I just received my Index results from Elysium Health and I am about to find out.
How exciting is it to know how well you’ve been aging? It’s like getting a grade on something you have been working at your whole life. Thankfully, my results are encouraging. With a biological age of 54, compared to my chronological age of 61, my cumulative rate of aging is .89. Meaning that, for everyone one year I’ve aged chronologically, I’ve only aged 0.89 years biologically. Good news! The even better news is that I can continue to improve, as no one’s rate of aging is fixed.
Being in the time we are in, with extra caution being advised for people over 60, if my immune cell response is that of someone who is 54 — well, that certainly feels better than if the test came back with a number more like 68 or 70. This is giving me even greater encouragement to continue to improve my cumulative rate of aging. Perhaps I can reduce my cumulative rate of aging even further from 0.89. Along with your report, Elysium Health provides a very nice graphic that illustrates how you may be able to do that. They have compiled and analyzed the current body of scientific research, and provide science-backed recommendations to support an approach to healthy living.
As I said, I am eager to see if I can I lower my 0.89 rate of aging even more. I’m also wondering if I can further improve the function of all my cells, including those very important immune cells.
This is what is so interesting about the Index test — by repeating it in another six to twelve months, I can learn a lot about the effectiveness of my entire health program. It sets a data point for my cumulative rate of aging, something which beforehand would have been just a guess based on how I felt that day. This first data point can then be combined with additional Index tests in the future, similar to how I regularly track my basic lipid levels.
It’s great to know I have been aging well, but that is just the beginning for me. By making changes to my health routine and taking the Index test again in six months, I will be able to see how I am doing and if I should consider additional modifications. Will I be able to get the 0.89 rate of aging to go down even more? Stay tuned, I’ll be reporting back on that when I get my next round of results.
Check out INDEX by Elysium Health here.
eagerly awaiting the follow up to this
Hi, I’m a 69-year-old woman with a biological age of 56…or .8. Being somewhat cynical, I expected results to skew old, since Elysium sells supplements. So I was pleasantly surprised. I’m curious about a few things, like whether older people have a better chance of seeing a bigger gap between their chronological and biological ages. I’m guessing yes, since a 16-year-old with a biological age of 3 (same 13-year gap as me) seems unlikely. I also wonder what the record is so far for the biggest gap between chronological and biological age. And finally, I wonder how Elysium’s data—from what I’d guess is an above-average, self-selecting sample of people, health-wise—compares to the population at large.