DNA methylation test

myDNAge has a $299 urine or blood test for DNA methylation, they're running a buy get one 50% off at the moment. Steve Perry recommends this company, I ordered a test and will let you know how it goes. I'm using the spread sheet that JGC  created on this excellent thread for comparison. I'm expecting they should agree +- 3 years, if not I'd suspect the Levine paper results. 

7replies Oldest first
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Active threads
  • Popular
  • Hi Dan. No rush but just wonder if you got results. Sorry if I overlooked them in case you posted in another thread. BTW, I wish to congratulate for your activity in this Forum and your posts. Best wishes for the new year and keep up the great work 😀

    Reply Like
    • albedo No problem, but no I haven't gotten it yet. Takes a number of weeks, plus we have the holidays. 

      Thanks for the kind words otherwise. 

      Reply Like
  • Hi Dan. Do you know how many CpG sites the DNAage probes? The original Horvath's clock uses 353 sites while the "new" one (Levine's 2018) aka DNAm PhenoAge uses 513.The two only partially overlap.

    Reply Like
    • albedo No I don't know what exactly they're testing, here is what they say

       

      The myDNAge® Epigenetic Aging Clock service is based on Steve Horvath’s aging clock and utilizes SWARM™ (Simplified Whole-panel Amplification Reaction Method) technology to analyze DNA methylation patterns of >500 genetic loci and provide epigenetic age predictions in a high throughput manner.

      Reply Like 2
  • <moved>

    I got the results of my test back, 48 +-3, and I'm 52. This was done as a baseline before I did NAD patches and started Metformin, but is with a life of healthy living (exercise and whole foods vegan, plus fasting the last five or ten). Disappointing, but it also said I was in the 91% percentile, meaning that I'm younger than 91% of their customers who are also at my age.

    A little surprising, I expected a lower measured biological age and a lower % as their customers (I assume that people testing for this would be a healthy lot). I also wonder how my reported age is used here. From the papers I'd expect it to be a pure measurement, but oftentimes with these kinds of things they'll normalize it for your age (a technique I've never been happy about).  

    For comparison the calculators gave me IIRC something like 35 and 45 calculatedbiological age. One of them at least was within the error bars of measured. 

     

    {reply from  albedo  }

    Thank you for sharing. 

    It would be interesting to repeat also after your metformin/NAD trial.  However, I feel today there is too much heterogeneity between the different methodologies to determine biological age and almost daily we get a new paper with a new calculator. DNA methylation looks to be a kind a standard that is imposing itself though. Your value is still positive though despite the error and despite I understand you were expecting much better.  I am trying to arrange this also for myself and maybe I will learn more to tell you in response. 

    I do not understand well the normalization process they seem to make. What does it mean? If normalization is to your age, then probably this hints to look longitudinally to a trend as I always thought, independently on the methodology? I tend to agree with you now: it looks like a relative measurement not an absolute one. And then we have, I guess, the unresolved issue of DNAm correlation vs causation of aging. Age is included in many of the calculators, e.g. the Levine's Phenotypic Age we discussed, but for the latter the reason was to convert the regression to a "year" measurement, IIRC.

    Reply Like
    •  albedo  I don't know that they are normalizing but am just guessing. Also I'm wondering what is really being measured here? Consider, the original researcher did statistical analysis to correlate methylation to bio age. This should calibrate out (or perhaps better 'include') the fact that people take care of themselves differently. If the statistics/data is really good, then he could theoretically find your biological age regardless of how good you take care of yourself. The short point is that this approach may well be measuring absolute markers of age (e.g. 'tree rings') rather than lifespan.

      The more I think of it, the more I'm believing this is the case, and it's perhaps not a good measure of likely lifespan. Regardless I will be taking the test again in six months. 

      Reply Like
      • albedo
      • albedo
      • 3 wk ago
      • Reported - view

      DanMcL 

      Interesting, thank you.

      Wrt repeated tests with Zymo remember to take into account the variability of their measurements at different points in time. Do they say something about this? Reason was emphasizing this aspect in one of his blogs:

      "...DNA methylation tests can be ordered from either Osiris Green or Epimorphy / Zymo Research - note that it takes a fair few weeks for delivery in the latter case. From talking to people at the two companis, the normal level of variability for repeat tests from the same sample is something like 1.7 years for the Zymo Research test and 4.8 years for the Osiris Green tests. The level of day to day or intraday variation between different samples from the same individual remains more of a question mark at this point in time, though I am told they are very consistent over measures separated by months. Nonetheless, as for the cardiovascular measures, it is wise to try to make everything as similar as possible when taking the test before and after a treatment: time of day, recency of eating or exercise, recent diet, and so forth..."

      Reply Like
Like2 Follow
  • 2 Likes
  • 3 wk agoLast active
  • 7Replies
  • 144Views
  • 2 Following