Thanks. Moreover nobody would use an epigenetic clock to refer to chronological age, because it's inferior in every way for that purpose. The purported use of

Thanks. Moreover nobody would use an epigenetic clock to refer to chronological age, because it's inferior in every way for that purpose. The purported use of an epigenetic clock in humans is that it predicts either aging effects of remaining life span in some sense; neither of these have been proven to be biologically true because in the first we don't necessarily have the definition of aging, and certainly don't have it down to a single axis, at best it is understood along many different dimensions, many of which are not captured by epigenetic measures. And second sense, predicting remaining life span, is completely unproven. Even more speculative is whether measures which change a person's epigenetic age will result in changes in remaining lifespan. There's a chance that epigenetic age becomes useful for something, but it's just a chance. It's not established science.