We’ve all seen the ads. Discover your true age. Reverse aging at the cellular level! Test your biological age and unlock the secrets of longevity.
It sounds exciting – empowering, even. After all, who wouldn’t want to know if their body is younger (or older) than their actual age? And better yet, who wouldn’t want to do something about it?
But the truth is, the numbers these tests give you are unlikely to mean much at all.
Let’s break this down from the beginning – starting with what these tests claim to measure.
Chronological Age vs. Biological Age
Chronological age is simple. It’s the number of years you’ve been alive – your age according to the calendar. If you were born in 1965, your chronological age is 60 in 2025. It’s fixed and objective.
Biological age, on the other hand, is an estimate of how your body is actually aging. It reflects your physical and cellular condition, which may be “younger” or “older” than your chronological age depending on lifestyle, genetics, environment, and more.
What Is a Biological Age Clock?
A biological age clock is a tool – usually an algorithm – that uses various biological data (like DNA methylation, blood markers, or proteins) to estimate your biological age.
There are many types, but one of the most popular is the epigenetic clock, which looks at DNA methylation, chemical tags on your DNA, to make this estimate.
These clocks are based on scientific research and while promising, have a long way to go before they can predict health and aging outcomes.
The Problem with Clocks
Despite the scientific roots, they come with a list of major caveats.
- No regulatory oversight: These tests are not approved or reviewed by the FDA or any health authority.
- No industry standard: Companies use different methods, and they don’t always disclose how their algorithms work.
- Lots of variation: Even the same person, sending in two samples, may get different results. In fact, it is more likely than not.
- No real action plan: Most results are vague and not tied to specific, personalized advice.
That means your biological age might show up as 64 today and 71 next week – and you won’t know if that’s because of a lifestyle change, a lab error, or just random noise.
“Track Over Time” Sounds Good, But…
Many companies will tell you that biological age is most useful when tracked over time.
The problem with that idea is that if the number itself is unstable or poorly understood, tracking it doesn’t give you much to work with.
Sure, you might see a “drop” in your biological age after changing your habits, but can you be sure it was your new diet or sleep routine – or just test variability?
Without standardized, repeatable results, even trendlines become questionable.
So… What Are These Tests Good For?
They’re not totally useless. For some people, they’re a gateway into better health awareness and behavior. You might find value if you’re curious and enjoy self-experimentation. If you understand the limitations and don’t treat the number as absolute truth. Or if you’re looking for motivation to make healthy changes (even if the “score” is just a psychological boost).
If the latter, however, be careful that you wouldn’t experience a negative score, one saying you’re six years older than you are, as a psychological setback.
They’re not diagnostic and they don’t provide personalized roadmaps to improve your health in a meaningful, evidence-based way.
Final Thoughts
The science of aging is evolving fast, and it’s genuinely exciting. Biological age clocks have potential. But the tests available today are still experimental, inconsistent, unregulated, and often misunderstood.
If you decide to use one, be curious, but cautious. Don’t hang your health – or your hopes – on a single number. And remember: the most powerful changes to your health don’t require a test. They just require consistency.
Eat real food. Move often. Sleep well. Reduce stress. Build meaningful connections.
Those things may not come in a sleek report – but they’re still the most reliable way to feel younger, longer.
Let’s Have a Conversation:
Have you ever taken a biological or epigenetic age test? How would you respond if a test told you your biological age was much older than your actual age? Would you rather have one clear number to track your aging, or a fuller picture with more nuance?
