This 2021 human study found:
“We report on a randomized controlled clinical trial conducted among 43 healthy adult males between the ages of 50-72. The 8-week treatment program included diet, sleep, exercise and relaxation guidance, and supplemental probiotics and phytonutrients.
This is the first randomized controlled study to suggest that specific diet and lifestyle interventions may reverse Horvath DNAmAge (2013) epigenetic aging in healthy adult males. Larger-scale and longer duration clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings, as well as investigation in other human populations.
In both treatment and control groups, there was no net increase or decrease in methylation of 353 sites that compose the Horvath clock. This finding suggests that intervention did not lead to an overall increase in methylation of Horvath clock sites, but rather it prompted a repositioning of clock CpG methylation patterns consistent with a younger biological age.
One significant limitation of this pilot trial is limited statistical power due to relatively small sample size. It is not yet fully established whether interventions that slow any methylation clocks necessarily curtail risks of age-related disease.”
https://www.aging-us.com/article/202913/text “Potential reversal of epigenetic age using a diet and lifestyle intervention: a pilot randomized clinical trial”
Baffled as to why these researchers relied on 2013 research rather than at least Dr. Horvath’s improved 2018 skin and blood clock, a review of which noted:
“Although the skin-blood clock was derived from significantly less samples (~900) than Horvath’s clock (~8000 samples), it was found to more accurately predict chronological age, not only across fibroblasts and skin, but also across blood, buccal and saliva tissue. A potential factor driving this improved accuracy in blood could be related to the approximate 18-fold increase in genomic coverage afforded by using Illumina 450k/850k beadarrays.”
Which would you prefer? A 2013 flip phone, or a 2018 smartphone?