Forget 'biological age' tests — longevity experts are using an $800 under-the-radar blood test to measure aging in real-time

Doctors and scientists are using a blood plasma test to study longevity.
The test measures proteins and can tell you about your organ health.
This field of proteomics could one day help detect diseases like cancer before they start.
Should you have that second cup of coffee? How about a little wine with dinner? And, is yogurt really your superfood?
Scientists are getting closer to offering consumers a blood test that could help people make daily decisions about how to eat, drink, and sleep that are more perfectly tailored to their unique biology.
The forthcoming tests could also help shape what are arguably far more important health decisions, assessing whether your brain is aging too fast, if your kidneys are OK, or if that supplement or drug you're taking is actually doing any good.
It's called an organ age test, more officially (and scientifically) known as "proteomics" — and it's the next hot "biological age" marker that researchers are arguing could be better than all the rest.
"If I could just get one clock right now, I'd want to get that clock, and I'd like to see it clinically available in older adults," cardiologist Eric Topol, author of the recent bestseller "Super Agers: An Evidence-Based Approach to Longevity," told Business Insider. Topol said armed with organ age test results, people could become more proactive stewards of their own health, before it's too late.
"When we have all these layers of data, it's a whole new day for preventing the disease," Topol said. "You see the relationship with women's hormones. You see the relationship with food and alcohol. You don't ever get that with genes."
A test like this isn't available to consumers just yet, but it's already being used by researchers at elite universities and high-end longevity clinics. They hope it can become a tool any doctor could use to assess patient health in the next few years.
A startup called Vero, which was spun out of some foundational proteomics research at Stanford University, is hoping to beta test a proteomics product for consumers this year.
"Knowing your oldest organ isn't the point; changing the trajectory is," Vero co-founder and CEO Paul Coletta told a crowd gathered at the Near Future Summit in Malibu, California, last month.
Coletta told Business Insider Vero's not interested in doing "wealthcare." The company plans to make its test available to consumers for around $200 a pop, at scale. Their draw only requires one vial of blood.
The big promise of proteomics is that it could be a more precise real-time tool for tracking important but subtle changes that emerge inside each of us as we age.
Genetic testing can measure how our bodies are built, spotting vulnerabilities in a person's DNA that might predispose them to health issues. Standard clinical measurements like a person's weight, blood pressure, or cholesterol readings are a useful proxy for potential health issues.
Then there are the increasingly popular "biological age" tests available to consumers at home. Most of those look at "epigenetic changes" — how environmental factors affect our gene expression.
Proteomics does something different and new. It measures the product that our bodies make based on all those genetic and environmental inputs: proteins. It offers a live assessment of how your body is running, not just how it's programmed.
If validated in the next few years, these tests could become key in early disease detection and prevention. They could help influence all kinds of medical decisions, from big ones like "What drugs should I take?" to little ones like "How does my body respond to caffeine or alcohol?"
Some high-end longevity clinics are already forging ahead using proteomics to guide clinical recommendations, albeit cautiously.
Dr. Evelyne Bischof, a longevity physician who treats patients worldwide, said she uses proteomic information to guide some of the lifestyle interventions she recommends to her patients.
She may suggest a more polyphenol-rich diet to someone who seems to have high inflammation and neuroinflammation based on proteomic test results, or may even suggest they do a little more cognitive training, based on what proteomics says about how their brain is aging.
Dr. Andrea Maier, a professor of medicine and functional aging at the National University of Singapore, told BI she uses this measurement all the time in her longevity clinics. For her, it's just a research tool, but if the results of her ongoing studies are decent, she hopes to be able to use it clinically in a few years' time.
"We want to know what kind of 'ageotype' a person is, so what type of aging personality are you, not from a mental perspective, but from a physical perspective," Maier said. "It's really discovery at this moment in time, and at the edge of being clinically meaningful."
"Once we have that validated tool, we will just add it to our routine testing and we can just tick the box and say, 'I also want to know if this person is a cardiac ager, or a brain ager, or a muscle ager' because now we have a sensitive parameter — protein — which can be added," Maier said.
The two big-name proteomics tests are Olink and SOMAscan. For now, their high-end screening costs around $400-$800 per patient.
"I'm losing lots of money at the moment because of proteomics for clinical research!" Maier said.
Top aging researchers at Stanford and Harvard are pushing the field forward, racing to publish more novel insights about the human proteome.
The latest findings from Harvard aging researcher Vadim Gladyshev's lab, published earlier this year, suggest that as we age, each person may even stand to benefit from a slightly different antiaging grocery list.
To research this idea, Gladyshev looked at proteins in the blood of more than 50,000 people in the UK, all participants in the UK Biobank who are being regularly tested and studied to learn more about their long-term health. He tracked their daily habits and self-reported routines like diet, occupation, and prescriptions, comparing those details to how each patient's organs were aging.
He discovered some surprising connections. Yogurt eating, generally speaking, tended to be associated with better intestinal aging but had relatively no benefit to the arteries. White wine drinking, on the other hand, seemed to potentially confer some small benefit to the arteries while wreaking havoc on the gut.
"The main point is that people age in different ways in different organs, and therefore we need to find personalized interventions that would fit that particular person," Gladyshev told BI. "Through measuring proteins, you assess the age of different organs and you say, 'OK, this person is old in this artery.'"
For now, there's too much noise in the data to do more. Dr. Pal Pacher, a senior investigator at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism who studies organ aging and injuries, told BI that proteomics is simply not ready for clinical use yet. There's just too much noise in the data.
But he imagines a future where a more sophisticated protein clock could help link up which people may be most vulnerable to diseases like early cancer, kidney disease, and more. (A California-based proteomics company called Seer announced last weekend that it is partnering with Korea University to study whether proteomics can help more quickly diagnose cancer in young people in their 20s and 30s.)
"How beautiful could it be in the future?" Maier said. "Instead of three hours of clinical investigation, I would have a tool which guides me much, much better, with more validity towards interventions."
Read the original article on Business Insider

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

38 minutes ago

• Yahoo

A longer ‘winter': Public funding slowdown heightens pressure on biotech startups

This story was originally published on BioPharma Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily BioPharma Dive newsletter. Biotechnology industry watchers were hopeful at the start of 2025. Venture funding appeared to be rebounding after a lengthy slump, and a smattering of new stock offerings and company acquisitions brewed optimism that the public markets might be similarly warming up to young drugmakers. But the positivity quickly dissipated. Trump administration policies gutted scientific research funding and raised questions about U.S. drug prices. Large layoffs and upheaval at public health agencies created regulatory turmoil that added risk to what's already, by its nature, a risky sector to invest in. The results were laid out in a June report from David Windley and Tucker Remmers, two analysts at the investment bank Jefferies. According to that report, funding in public biotech companies — be it from initial public offerings, follow-on stock offerings, or 'PIPE' deals — plummeted in May. The 'political and economic uncertainties' have "cast a cloud over biotech investment,' they wrote. 'Since product development cycles can range 12-15 years in this industry, biotechs (and their boards and investors) want clarity on FDA regulation, drug pricing, and funding before committing to large, [long-term] investments,' Windley and Remmers wrote. Investors and industry insiders interviewed by BioPharma Dive say that the public slowdown is trickling down to startups that have already been under intense pressure during a prolonged pullback. Companies and investors are struggling to align on valuations, making funding rounds more difficult to close than in prior years. The uphill battle in the public markets is further delaying IPO plans, too. "People are waiting to see what happens, and it's extended that winter," said Tim Scott, the president of Biocom California, an industry trade group. To date, only seven biotech companies have priced IPOs in 2025, and no large offerings have occurred since mid-February. No biotechs have publicly disclosed IPO ambitions in several months either, and one of the last to do so, Odyssey Therapeutics, pulled its offering in May. In a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission, CEO Gary Glick wrote that it was 'not in the best interests of the company' to go public at that time. One reason IPOs have ground to a halt, experts say, is that the public markets aren't rewarding drug startups as predictably as they once were. Typically, drug companies can expect their value to climb after delivering positive clinical results. But 'even companies with good data aren't seeing a lot of movement in the public markets,' said Jonathan Norris, a managing director at HSBC Innovation Banking. As a result, Norris said, companies are looking at the time and expense it takes in the monthslong process to go public and wondering: 'What's the benefit?' 'If you have any readouts that are even eye squinting, you're going to get crushed,' he said. 'It's a tough, tough endeavor.' The shuttered IPO window is exacerbating problems for young biotechs. "If you don't have a public market opportunity, then the companies that are private have to think about ways to raise capital and stay private for longer," said Maina Bhaman, a partner at Sofinnova Partners. Feeling that burden, venture investors are becoming more conservative. While private funding hasn't plummeted as much as its public counterpart, investors are more selective and slower-moving. Funding has become increasingly consolidated into fewer and larger 'megarounds,' to the extent that more firms are compiling similar portfolios. And they're hard to finalize, even when most of a funding syndicate is already onboard, according to Norris. "People are struggling to figure out where the bottom of the market is and what's the appropriate valuation and expectation for that investment,' he said. "A lot of VCs are pencils down right now on deals they would otherwise be moving forward on,' Scott added. Pullbacks are nothing new in biotech. But what has been unusual, some say, is how long the sector has spent in the doldrums after peaking in early 2021. One reason is the most recent boom flooded the market with more companies than it could support. But another is that the ensuing correction has intensified amid regulatory and political upheaval. A report last week from Roel van den Akker, PwC's U.S. pharma and life science deals leader, predicted that companies will be 'preparing contingency plans' to account for delays in 'trial oversight' and drug applications. Drug companies are used to dealing with a high level of risk, as most experimental medicines never make it to market. But 'now you've got a lot more macro uncertainty that is being layered on top," Bhaman said. On the public side, that uncertainty has resulted in less patient investors, some of whom are pressing company boards to shut down after setbacks rather than change course. But some startups are taking drastic steps, too, such as cutting programs and staff to, some experts believe, depress their value so they can still attract investment. The "lack of surety" is pressuring biotechs to be as efficient as possible with their cash, Scott said, perhaps working on one program instead of a few. There have been multiple high-profile examples of late. Eikon Therapeutics and Insitro, two well-funded startups, both cited a need for 'prudence' in laying off staff. Norris expects more companies to proactively cut staff, or even close, as the longer-than-expected winter drags on. 'Most of those companies are not going to find the investors that they're hoping for,' he said. 'And I think that's just the unfortunate truth.' Recommended Reading Radiopharmaceutical drugmaker RayzeBio signals plans to go public

Yahoo

38 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Should You Forget Medical Properties Trust and Buy These Unstoppable Dividend Stocks Instead?

Medical Properties Trust has a 7.2% yield and a history of dividend cuts behind it. Other healthcare REITs have high yields and dividends that have withstood adversity much better. Omega Healthcare has a 7.4% yield, and LTC Properties has a 6.5% yield. 10 stocks we like better than Medical Properties Trust › Medical Properties Trust (NYSE: MPW) has a lofty 7.2% yield. That compares to the S&P 500 index's skinny little 1.2% yield, and the average real estate investment trust's (REIT's) yield of around 4.1%. On the surface, it appears to be an obvious choice. But don't jump at the chance to buy Medical Properties Trust just yet. You can get similarly large yields from healthcare REIT peers Omega Healthcare (NYSE: OHI) and LTC Properties (NYSE: LTC), and both offer a more compelling dividend story than Medical Properties. Here's what you need to know. Take a look at the chart below for Medical Properties Trust. The orange line is the quarterly dividend, and the purple line is the stock price. Notice the massive drop in both that has occurred since 2022. That was when some of the REIT's large tenants started to experience financial troubles. It was the start of a tense and complicated period when a small number of Medical Properties Trust's tenants failed, and it had no choice but to cut its dividend. For long-term dividend investors, the lofty 7.2% yield on offer from Medical Properties Trust comes with some lofty risks. It's possible that the bad news is all out, and the REIT can start to turn its business around. However, that's far from a certainty. Unless you're willing to bet that the future will look much brighter from here, most dividend investors will probably want to tread with caution. In fact, even if a turnaround is underway, it's likely to be a years-long process. There's a contrast to be made here with healthcare REITs Omega Healthcare and LTC Properties. Both of these REITs focus on senior housing, including nursing homes and assisted living facilities. During the coronavirus pandemic's height, both of these property types were hard hit. The reason was pretty simple: COVID-19 is particularly deadly for unvaccinated older adults and spreads easily in group settings. Occupancy fell for both REITs, and there was a drought of new customers. Both Omega and LTC also had to deal with tenant problems, as some of their lessees had trouble paying rent. That would seem like a perfect storm that would lead to a dividend cut. Yet neither Omega nor LTC cut their dividends. To be fair, neither of these REITs has increased their dividends in years. But a static dividend is much better than a dividend cut. Right now, Omega's yield is 7.4%, while more diversified LTC Properties has a 6.5% yield. The future is starting to look brighter for each of these healthcare REITs. Omega's adjusted funds from operations (FFO) rose year over year in the first quarter of 2025, and it increased its full-year guidance. LTC Properties, meanwhile, expects 2025's adjusted FFO per share to be flat to slightly higher. However, it's diversifying its business approach to include senior housing operating properties (SHOP). (SHOP assets are owned and operated by the REIT, though it actually hires a third party to handle day-to-day management of the asset.) As it grows, this business should increasingly benefit from the growth in demand for senior housing as the U.S. population ages. The key takeaway here, however, is that, when faced with adversity, Omega and LTC Properties held firm in their commitment to shareholders. They adjusted as needed to keep paying. Medical Properties Trust, on the other hand, couldn't manage that feat. The past doesn't predict the future, of course, but the past is all we have to go on as investors. And since all three of these healthcare REITs have faced material adversity just recently, their strengths and weaknesses have been laid bare. While the worst might be over for Medical Properties Trust, most dividend investors should probably err on the side of caution with either Omega, which has a higher yield, or LTC Properties, which has a lower yield but a far more diversified business model. Before you buy stock in Medical Properties Trust, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Medical Properties Trust wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $659,171!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $891,722!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 995% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 Reuben Gregg Brewer has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Should You Forget Medical Properties Trust and Buy These Unstoppable Dividend Stocks Instead? was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio

Washington Post

an hour ago

• Washington Post

How to feel about climate change? A scientist reflects on anger, hope and love.

Kate Marvel is a climate scientist. She spends her days working with climate models, watching temperatures climb, glaciers melt and seas rise — and she has some feelings about it. Marvel's new book is called 'Human Nature: Nine Ways to Feel About Our Changing Planet,' and it's organized around emotions. There is anger, grief and fear, of course — but there is also wonder, surprise, hope and love.