Small effects, read honestly
Longevity genetics does not work through decisive genes. It works through many small, unevenly evidenced signals — and the discipline is in reporting them as they are.
How 183 variants are chosen
Selection is a filtering process, not a collection exercise.
Association with longevity, specifically
Candidate variants must be associated with exceptional survival, human lifespan or parental lifespan — not with a disease that has been renamed as a longevity outcome.
Replication across independent cohorts
A single positive study is not enough. Variants must hold up in populations that were not used to discover them.
Effect size, stated plainly
Reported effects in this field are typically odds ratios of roughly 1.1–1.4. We publish the magnitude with the finding so it cannot be mistaken for something larger.
Population relevance
Where evidence derives largely from one ancestry group, that limitation is recorded and reflected in how the variant is graded for you.
Independence from other markers
Variants in linkage or measuring the same biology are not counted repeatedly, which would inflate the picture.
Uncertain markers are not forced into a score
Grading is the mechanism that keeps a deep report honest.
Replicated in independent cohorts with consistent direction of effect. These variants carry weight in the signature.
Promising but not yet firmly replicated. Reported and visible, with reduced weight and an explicit caveat.
Interesting, unstable or population-limited. Shown for transparency and deliberately excluded from any score.
Retired or superseded by later evidence. Kept in the record so historical versions of your report remain interpretable.
Four lines we do not blur
A variant found more often in long-lived people has not been shown to cause long life.
What you inherited and what your biology is doing today are different findings and are never merged.
Suggesting a value be watched is not a recommendation to treat anything.
Aevum informs a conversation with a clinician; it does not conclude one.
A measurement, not a verdict
DNA-methylation clocks estimate biological age from patterns of methylation at defined sites in the genome. Taken from the same blood draw as your biomarker panel, the measurement is repeatable — which is the property that makes it useful.
A single reading is a baseline. Its value emerges when it is repeated, because the direction and rate of change is far more informative than the absolute number, which carries genuine measurement variability.
For that reason Aevum reports methylation age with its uncertainty, alongside chronological age, and never as a standalone score of how you are doing.
No epigenetic clock estimates remaining lifespan. Aevum does not present it as one.
The technical detail behind validation, standards and governance lives on a separate page.
Validation & standards