Biological age and why it matters

The ageing process is a complex and multifactorial phenomenon that affects virtually all physiological systems in the body. Biological ageing is the progressive decline in physiological functions that occurs with advancing age, eventually leading to an increased risk of age-related diseases and mortality. As such, identifying reliable biomarkers for measuring biological age has become a major research focus, as it could aid in developing interventions to promote healthy ageing and extend healthspan.

Chronological age and biological age are two distinct measures used to evaluate the aging process in individuals. Chronological age refers to the number of years that have elapsed since an individual's birth, while biological age reflects an individual's physiological and functional age. Chronological age is an objective measure that is easy to determine, while biological age is a more complex measure that takes into account a variety of factors, such as genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors. While chronological age is a static measure, biological age is dynamic and can be influenced by factors such as physical activity, diet, and stress levels. While chronological age is important for legal and social purposes, biological age is a better predictor of an individual's health and risk of age-related diseases.

Currently, several approaches for measuring biological age have been developed and are being used in research and clinical settings. These include epigenetic clocks, telomere length, proteomics, metabolomics, and transcriptomics. Epigenetic clocks, for instance, utilize DNA methylation patterns to estimate biological age. At the same time, telomere length measures the protective caps at the ends of chromosomes that shorten with age. They provide accurate and reliable estimates of an individual's biological age, which can then be used to predict their risk of age-related diseases and mortality. For instance, recent studies have shown that epigenetic clocks are better predictors of mortality than chronological age alone. This is because they capture the cumulative effects of biological ageing, which may vary across individuals due to genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors.

Moreover, measuring biological age can aid in developing personalized interventions to promote healthy ageing and extend healthspan. For instance, if an individual is found to have an accelerated biological age, they could be targeted for interventions to reduce their risk of age-related diseases, such as lifestyle modifications or pharmacological interventions.

In addition, measuring biological age could also aid in developing and testing new interventions aimed at extending healthspan. By identifying ageing individuals at a slower rate than expected, researchers could study the factors contributing to healthy ageing and develop interventions to promote these factors in others.

In conclusion, the current protocols and approaches for measuring biological age are essential in healthcare and healthspan. They provide a means to accurately estimate an individual's risk of age-related diseases and mortality. In addition, they could aid in developing personalized interventions to promote healthy ageing and extend healthspan. As such, continued research and development in this area are crucial for improving health outcomes and quality of life in ageing populations.

‍