Half of the article discusses the whole concept of "biological age", and that discussion describes how that term may not be as refined and specific a scientific idea as a layperson might assume. That part of the article might be served by the title, "Weight loss drugs may help scientists to assess potential surrogates for biological age."
It's well known that eating less "caloric restriction" slows down your metabolim and thus extends lifespan in mice. This would be my default hypothesis.
>"Both companies found that overweight or diabetic patients taking the drugs, called GLP-1s, had reduced biological age compared to those taking a placebo"
>“In an unhealthy population, I do think it’s an anti-aging drug, but in a healthy population, no one knows.”
Half of the article discusses the whole concept of "biological age", and that discussion describes how that term may not be as refined and specific a scientific idea as a layperson might assume. That part of the article might be served by the title, "Weight loss drugs may help scientists to assess potential surrogates for biological age."
It's well known that eating less "caloric restriction" slows down your metabolim and thus extends lifespan in mice. This would be my default hypothesis.
How can they separate this from the effects of losing weight?
After reading the article, I think they didn't.
>"Both companies found that overweight or diabetic patients taking the drugs, called GLP-1s, had reduced biological age compared to those taking a placebo"
>“In an unhealthy population, I do think it’s an anti-aging drug, but in a healthy population, no one knows.”
Sounds like it's the already known "being overweight raises your biological age" and they're just acknowledging the inverse.
...convienent.
For who?
the users of said drugs and the drugmakers. but inconvenient to mortal enemies of people who are now (purportedly) living longer.
Now you can take longer in the planning stage without the pressure of nature breathing down your neck.
[dead]