3 ms·

> ...he’s reduced his overall biological age by... Without even looking, I'm almost certain the way they technically define "biological age" is misleading, and

> ...he’s reduced his overall biological age by... Without even looking, I'm almost certain the way they technically define "biological age" is misleading, and it resembles what most people think of when they hear "age" like an apple resembles an orange.

generalizations 4y ago
> I'm almost certain the way they technically define "biological age" is misleading I'd be curious how you came to that conclusion - considering that there's currently no known way to objectively measure biological age. Best thing that any researcher can do right now is just measure everything, and that's what they're doing.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  >> I'm almost certain the way they technically define "biological age" is misleading > I'd be curious how you came to that conclusion - considering that there's currently no known way to objectively measure biological age. Best thing that any researcher can do right now is just measure everything, and that's what they're doing. I came to that conclusion because, if they have a definition, they're almost certainly measuring things they can easily measure and perhaps influence, which aren't really the things people speak about when they talk about age. I don't care how fit this guy is, he's not living to 140 by doing the stuff he's doing.
  - generalizations 4y ago
    You can see for yourself the things that they're measuring: https://archive.is/TADr1#bryan-johnsons-blueprint https://archive.is/TADr1#bryan-johnsons-blueprint
notahacker 4y ago
Certainly the "lung capacity and fitness of an 18 year old" that's the headline feature is a VO2Max score which is extremely variable, responsive to training and doesn't decline that steeply. Looking at his posted "18 year old" score in comparison with reference charts, it's a bit above average for someone in their mid twenties (who probably doesn't work out much), well into the "very good" range for someone about to turn 40, and yes it's excellent for someone who's 47... but it's an upper percentile score for someone in an upper percentile of fitness obsession, not a miraculous teenage body.

generalizations 4y ago

> I'm almost certain the way they technically define "biological age" is misleading I'd be curious how you came to that conclusion - considering that there's currently no known way to objectively measure biological age. Best thing that any researcher can do right now is just measure everything, and that's what they're doing.

tablespoon 4y ago
>> I'm almost certain the way they technically define "biological age" is misleading > I'd be curious how you came to that conclusion - considering that there's currently no known way to objectively measure biological age. Best thing that any researcher can do right now is just measure everything, and that's what they're doing. I came to that conclusion because, if they have a definition, they're almost certainly measuring things they can easily measure and perhaps influence, which aren't really the things people speak about when they talk about age. I don't care how fit this guy is, he's not living to 140 by doing the stuff he's doing.
- generalizations 4y ago
  You can see for yourself the things that they're measuring: https://archive.is/TADr1#bryan-johnsons-blueprint https://archive.is/TADr1#bryan-johnsons-blueprint

notahacker 4y ago

Certainly the "lung capacity and fitness of an 18 year old" that's the headline feature is a VO2Max score which is extremely variable, responsive to training and doesn't decline that steeply. Looking at his posted "18 year old" score in comparison with reference charts, it's a bit above average for someone in their mid twenties (who probably doesn't work out much), well into the "very good" range for someone about to turn 40, and yes it's excellent for someone who's 47... but it's an upper percentile score for someone in an upper percentile of fitness obsession, not a miraculous teenage body.