5 replies to this topic

[Michael Lustgarten]

[albedo]

Wonderful you took on this which is greatly important, maybe even applicable to other clocks.

Will take the time and deep dive!

[albedo]

Thank you. I liked your recap chart on what you carefully loot at:

 

 Screenshot 2025-02-21 235600.png   274.19KB   0 downloads

 

I still think Phenotypic Age it is a great predictor of mortality, informs on relative importance of the included biomarkers (e.g. RDW) and complement specific biomarkers check in risk population.

However I also still cannot make my mind on inclusion of chronological age in the regression formula.

Edited by albedo, 21 February 2025 - 11:06 PM.

[Michael Lustgarten]

Thank you. I liked your recap chart on what you carefully loot at:

 

Screenshot 2025-02-21 235600.png

 

I still think Phenotypic Age it is a great predictor of mortality, informs on relative importance of the included biomarkers (e.g. RDW) and complement specific biomarkers check in risk population.

However I also still cannot make my mind on inclusion of chronological age in the regression formula.

Yep, that's a fair point. Even if we discard chronological age, (imo) it's important to track year-to-year changes for each of those 9 (and other) biomarkers, to try to slow aging of their related systems.

[Mind]

I entered my data into Levin's Phenotypic age calculator and my biological age was 35.68 (chronological age is 54.1), so about 18.5 years younger. While I think this calculator is pretty good, it isn't perfect, because I am getting a small amount of grey hair. If my body was truly 35 years old, I would not have grey hair.

[Michael Lustgarten]

18.5y younger is great news, congrats!

The data wasn't trained on grey hair, which is an opportunity for a lab somewhere to develop it...