Aging vs. biological age: Conceptual considerations for age reversal claims.

Jesse R Poganik, Alibek Moldakozhayev, Jamie N Justice, Matt Kaeberlein, Peter D Adams, Kenneth Rockwood, Luigi Ferrucci, Vadim N Gladyshev

Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: [email protected] of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: [email protected]. · pubmed

Paper

Abstract

Whether reversal of biological age and/or aging is possible is among the most actively debated topics in the field of aging. Here, we consider the meaning of biological age reversal and its burden of proof, focusing on foundational issues and the language we use to debate these questions.

The following analysis is generated by AI and may contain errors. It is separate from the authors’ abstract and is not peer review.

Research summary

The paper argues that the concept of "biological age reversal" is currently ill-defined and that the burden of proof for such claims is not properly established. This is relevant because it addresses the foundational conceptual and methodological framework required to validate claims of aging reversal, which is central to the field of longevity research.

Author of this paper? Send a correction.