In this interview, Claudia von Boeselager talks with Chris Mirabile about epigenetic clocks and how they are used to assess biological age. They explain that first‑generation clocks (circa 2011) were designed to predict chronological age from DNA methylation patterns, while second‑generation clocks shift focus to biological age, which reflects an individual’s risk of morbidity and mortality. An example of a second‑generation clock is GrimAge, which directly estimates mortality risk. The discussion then moves to the third‑generation Dunedin Pace Clock, developed by researchers at Duke and Columbia and incorporated into Novos’ “Novos Age” product. This clock measures the pace of aging by integrating about 18 biomarkers—including grip strength, brain white‑matter integrity, cognition, sit‑stand performance, and blood markers—derived from a longitudinal study of over 1,000 New Zealanders spanning 50 years. The pace clock is presented as the most sensitive and accurate biological‑age metric, capable of detecting changes within roughly three months. An analogy likens total distance driven over a lifetime to cumulative age, whereas the pace clock reflects current speed, which can be altered quickly. Chris recommends testing once a year to control for seasonal confounders (e.g., sunlight, diet, stress), but suggests quarterly testing for those with no budget constraints who want finer resolution. He emphasizes consistent timing of tests to ensure observed changes are due to interventions rather than seasonal variation. The interview concludes with Claudia inviting viewers to sign up for a short longevity‑and‑lifestyle email newsletter.
Let's talk about epigenetic clocks and biological age testing. Chris, can you tell us about your journey there and what it's come to currently?
Sure, sure. Epigenetic clocks are looking at your epigenome and there are specific, there's specific genes that are turned on or off that are correlated with your age. Now there are different generations of these the first generation of the clocks were trying to correlate the outcome to your chronological age. And this was, I believe, around 2011 or so. Since then, we've made a shift to focusing on the second generation clocks, which want to essentially find biological age. And what's biological age? It is your risk of morbidity and mortality, right? We all know the, the the mortality tables that insurers have, right? Life insurers have for, depending on your chronological age, you have a different chance of passing away and it goes up exponentially as you get older. A 90-year-old has a far higher chance of dying tomorrow than a 20-year-old does. And so looking at that biologically though is quite different because you can have two people who are chronologically the same age, let's say 45 years old, But biologically, you can have someone in that cohort that looks like they're 60, and you can have someone in that cohort who looks like they're 35. And when you hold, when you put the photographs of the two of them side by side, you think they are two completely different ages, but they aren't by our standard definition of age. Biologically speaking, they are quite different. So that's the second generation clocks looking at the mortality risk. In fact, one of them is literally called GrimAge, right? The third generation clocks that are brand new, we're offering one of them at Novos called the Dunedin Pace Clock. The Novos product is called Novos Age, and it consists of 3 different tests in it, but the main test is the Dunedin Pace Clock. And this was produced by researchers at Duke University and Columbia University. And this actually looks at the pace of aging.. And they looked at, I believe, 18 different markers of aging. And so they are monitoring grip strength, white matter in the brain, and cognition, and sit-stand test, and so on, blood markers as well. And they did this for over 1,000 people and over the span of more than 50 years in New Zealand. And that's why it's called Dunedin, because that's the university that did this in, or the town in New Zealand that this was recorded in. And so they were able to do a longitudinal analysis. In other words, over time for over 1,000 people, how they were aging with different circumstances, even things like somebody who grew up in a, in an abusive home as a child versus someone who didn't. It's found that they age more quickly. And that's the psychological element of aging. And so this is considered to be the most powerful biological age clock ever created and the most accurate as well. And it is predictive of disease risk, predictive of mortality. And what we particularly like about it is that it tells you your biological pace or rate of aging at this point in time. So it's the most sensitive to change as well. So an analogy I like to give is that if you're driving in a car, and you've been driving for 50 years, it's hard to change the total distance that you've driven over 50 years. It'll take you a long time to be able to make an impact on those 50 years, right? Whereas to change your speed that you're driving in that car by pressing the gas or the brake, you can do almost instantly. Researchers have found that within 3 months or so, you can see a change in your pace of aging. Through this clock. And we recommend at Novos that you test once a year so that you can rule out confounding factors that might occur based on seasonality. Like in the winter, your lifestyle is completely different than it is in the summer. And those are confounding factors that you might try to minimize, but you can't get rid of all of them. So if you test at the same time every year, you can be sure that the interventions you've added to your lifestyle are really effective.
How often would you recommend testing? Just once a year? Is that like a good marker or do you think more frequent if you're doing lifestyle changes and want to see the results?
Yeah. So if you want to be very precise with the results and be absolutely certain or close to certain that what you've done has made an impact once a year because of that seasonality effect is what I would recommend. And if budget is an issue, then once a year is a healthy frequency for it. And believe me, this doesn't doesn't work for us commercially in the sense I'd love to say, yeah, buy it every month. Right. Buy 12 kits a year. This is really just looking in the best interest of the customer. With that said, if money isn't an object and you are curious, then you could do it once every, say, 3 months, right? Once every season. But you need to be very mindful of the ways that things that you might not even be fully aware of how they can impact your pace of aging. For example, in the winter to the summer, how much does your sun exposure change the vitamin D production through your skin and in the hormonal effects that can have on your epigenome, your vacation, your stress levels, your alcohol consumption, your food and dietary intake, the amount of calories, the timing, and the types of foods you're eating. There's just so many things that can change from December 27th versus July 27th that we tend to recommend Just normalize it and take the test ideally on the same day or the same week, or at least the same month that you took it last time.
Hi everyone, this is Claudia again. Before you take off, would you like to get a short email from me with some short but sweet fun tips, tricks, and updates on all things longevity and lifestyle? This could be cool products that I've discovered, interesting posts or articles I've read, and other fun and helpful things around longevity and lifestyle I've found for you. It's a very short piece of inspiration for you a few times a month. So if you want to receive it, check it out by going to longevity-and-lifestyle.com. That's longevity-and-lifestyle.com. And leave your email to sign up for the next one.
