In the quest for longevity, it's easy to get swept up in the latest trends and fads, from IV drips to peptides and supplements. But what does the science actually say? I had the opportunity to attend the Longevity Summit in Dublin, where some of the world's leading ageing scientists gathered to discuss the latest research. My question to them was simple: does any of this work, and would you take it yourself? The consensus was clear: while there are promising developments on the horizon, the current state of affairs is far from revolutionary. The biggest myth, according to Dr. Matt Kaeberlein, is that you can't do anything about how you age. In my opinion, this is a dangerous misconception. While the scientists were measured in their advice, they did offer some valuable insights. The key to a long life, they say, is a combination of lifestyle factors. Eat a high-quality diet, exercise regularly, get good sleep, have some friends, and manage your stress well. Personally, I find it fascinating that these seemingly simple practices have such a profound impact on our health and longevity. What makes this particularly interesting is that these recommendations are backed by a wealth of scientific evidence. A meta-analysis pooling 148 studies and more than 300,000 people found that those with stronger social ties were about 50% more likely to be alive at follow-up - an effect its authors compared to giving up smoking. However, the scientists were quick to point out that there's no one-size-fits-all approach. The order of things matters. It's not just about what you take, but what you measure. In my view, this raises a deeper question: how do we strike a balance between the latest trends and the tried-and-true methods? The answer, it seems, lies in testing first and supplementing second. The scams to watch out for are the IV drips and peptides that promise miraculous results but lack compelling evidence. These are the types of treatments that are often sold before the evidence exists to back them up. In my opinion, this highlights a critical issue: the need for better regulation and oversight in the longevity industry. The scientists were also quick to point out the importance of individual testing. As Dr. Rozalyn Anderson put it, 'in her lab, they weigh each animal - mice and monkeys - down to 0.1 of a gram to decide how much drug to give them. And yet for people, take two, two in the morning, two in the afternoon. It’s so unsophisticated.' This raises a question: how can we ensure that the latest treatments are safe and effective for everyone? The good news is that there are promising developments on the horizon. Dr. Kaeberlein's work on rapamycin, for example, shows promise in slowing ageing in the lab. And there's a homegrown chapter, too: TriviumVet, a Waterford company founded by two friends of his, has won FDA conditional approval for a rapamycin drug for the most common heart condition in cats. What's changing fastest is our ability to see ageing happen. Steve Horvath, who built the first multi-tissue 'epigenetic clock' that estimates biological age from a blood sample, told me what excites him most isn't a molecule: 'The exciting part is actual human clinical trials' - for the first time, measuring whether something works, in people, while they’re alive to benefit. In conclusion, while the quest for longevity is far from over, the consensus among the scientists is clear: the key to a long life is a combination of lifestyle factors, testing first, and supplementing second. The powder salesmen may promise more, but the science tells a different story. Personally, I find this fascinating, and I'm eager to see what the future holds for longevity research.
