Admittedly not a great take on functional biomarkers, but here it is just because its out there at a popular newspaper, from the Wall Street Journal:
Are You Fit for Your Age? Test Yourself With These Exercises
Measuring your cardiovascular fitness, strength and balance can give a read on how well you’re aging
Having an idea of your so-called fitness age matters. You can slow various declines in health through relatively minor changes, say academics and health professionals. Cardiovascular changes, for example, have been shown to add years to your life.
The first step is to track your fitness benchmarks in areas such as aerobic capacity and muscular endurance. Then, you should aim to keep them in an optimal range to help manage your aging, says Dr. Randall Espinoza, associate director at the UCLA Longevity Center. (You can try some sample tests below.)
While there is no universally agreed-upon way to measure fitness age, a true road map to longevityshould also consider diet, consistent and adequate sleep, and maintaining social ties.
Full article: Are You Fit for Your Age? Test Yourself With These Exercises (WSJ)
1 Like
Attia has a new company focused on individualized exercise programs for longevity…
This article discusses the approach and some biomarkers they use:
The 10 Squared squad are like fitness precogs in Minority Report, connecting clues in the present to prevent a bad event before it happens in the future. They will triangulate the results from the 30 drills I do for stability, strength, and cardio; factor in my body composition from a DEXA scan; then prescribe a fitness plan to power me for the next five decades. That’s not a typo; this program is not 7-Minute Abs! or Great Shape in 4 Weeks! It’s a training blueprint for your whole life.
The Author’s Key Results & 10 Squared’s Target Numbers
DEXA SCAN: Lean mass (aka muscle)
RESULT: 97th Percentile
GOAL: 75th percentile or above
DEXA SCAN: Body fat
RESULT: 50th percentile
GOAL: 25th percentile (for body fat, lower is better) (I need to go from 23% fat to 18% or lower.)
CARDIO: Based on VO2 max
RESULT: 43.8 High for a 50 to 59-year-old
GOAL: 53+ Elite for 30- to 39-year-olds
STRENGTH: Using a hand grip strength device
RESULT: Right: 55.1 kg, Left: 49.2 kg, 85th percentile
GOAL: 75th percentile or above (Less than 30 kg is considered frail.)
STABILITY: Single-leg Romberg test: stand on one leg eyes closed
RESULT: Right: Not stable after 5 seconds, Left: Not stable after 2 seconds
GOAL: 20 seconds without foot or lower-leg movement, swaying, or arm waving
Peter Attia's 10 Squared: The Three Pillars of Forever Fitness
3 Likes
AST and ALT are not very good for assessing liver health. New info for me. Here is MedCram talking about liver function and markers.
1 Like
In other walks in life, I sometimes find it instructive to challenge myself to identify a sparse set of criteria.
Limiting the topic to vascular health, I think Apo(b) + Lp-PLA2 + hsCRP would capture most of the variance.
VO2max alone might do a pretty good job of tracking musculoskeletal health.
Has anyone here conducted an exercise to come up with what blood metrics they would track if the total number were limited to, say, five or even 10?
Sure:
Albumin, Creatinine, Glucose, CRP, Lymphocytes, MCV, RDW, Alkaline Phosphatase, WBC, Cholesterol.
Why? All but the cholesterol are the ones on the Levine-derived spreadsheet calculator.
I am including cholesterol because many in the forum place a high value on this.
2 Likes
I like this list. Are you referencing LDL-C or total? It seems like the evidence is that the single metric Apo(b) will capture most of the variance of interest and it can play even of TC is relatively low.
I think Apo(b) is modulated by Apo A-1 and CRP but that kind of thinking makes for a bigger list.
Judging from the responses on the various threads, LDC seems to be the favorite marker.
Though a lipid panel is fairly cheap. A lipid panel from Ulta Lab Tests is only ~$22
Chol/HDLC Ratio
Cholesterol, Total
HDL Cholesterol
LDL-Cholesterol
Non-HDL Cholesterol
Triglycerides
Being reminded of an adage from another era, “Sorry I didn’t have time to write a shorter letter,” I find it easier to come up with a list of 20-30 metrics that cover the issues than I do with five or 10.
The only thing I’m reasonably sure of is that the list should be derived from how much variance it accounts for in life- and health-span outcomes. This is an empirical question. But aren’t most of the models we see about what should and should not count based more on theory than fact? And isn’t any short list going to be dynamic; e.g., if your lipids are optimal (whatever that is), elevated blood pressure will account for a smaller proportion of the variance.
One underexplored contribution to knowing what we should measure and manage might be obtained by working backwards from individuals who have excellent conventional metrics and yet die young from an ASCVD event. How does that happen and why don’t our current metrics account for it?
1 Like
Yes, ApoB and LDL are very important for men. 1 in 3 people globally will die from heart related issues (CVD). 2 out of 3 men will have heart and cholesterol problems. I also have a familial history with my grandparents and parents having heart disease issues. In order for Rapamycin to work for me, I have to jump the CVD hurdle first by keeping my ApoB and LDL low!
2 Likes
