It is not unusual for some people to look older than they are - scientists have confirmed that some people age at a radically different rate than others. So if some seem to be aging more gracefully than others, they're probably aging faster on the inside, too.
What is biological age vs. chronological age?
At the most basic level, chronological age is the number of years a person has been alive, while biological age refers to how old a person appears to be.
A 2015 study of approximately 1000 men and women born between April 1972 and March 1973 (all aged 38 at the time) examined biological age compared to chronological age to better understand the participants' 'pace of ageing'. The research team used 18 biological markers - including blood pressure, organ function, cholesterol, dental health and metabolism - to estimate the biological age of each participant.
The results showed that the biological and chronological ages of the majority of respondents match, that is, their appearance is suitable for their age. However, a certain percentage recorded a much younger biological age than the chronological one, i.e. much older.
Most people aged on average year after year, but some aged three years in one, while for a certain number of lucky people, aging during one year was close to zero, brings Yourtango.
"What we discovered is a clear connection between the fact that if a person looks older on the outside, he ages faster on the inside, so the dynamics of aging can be measured in younger people, not only in the elderly - explains the author of the study, Daniel Belsky, professor of medicine and assistant professor at the University Duke.
Men and women who did not perform well on biological measures of aging also did worse on tests of coordination and balance, as well as cognitive abilities such as problem solving and mental acuity.
Biologically older people also reported greater difficulty with simple physical activities such as walking and climbing stairs.
The aim of this research was to detect the dynamics of aging in the subjects at an early age so that preventive measures could be taken, that is, biological aging could be slowed down in time. These preventive measures include lifestyle changes - better nutrition, regular recreation and relaxation.
Belsky called the study's findings a proof-of-concept—'a demonstration intended to confirm that certain concepts or theories have the potential for real-world application'—for using biological markers to measure the aging process in people who would otherwise be considered too young to develop the disease. diseases associated with aging.
Those findings were later questioned because they did not appear to account for one possible confounding factor—weight gain.
Additional questions
In a letter titled 'Is the onset of obesity the same as aging?', Anne B. Newman from the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health writes that their analysis is fundamentally flawed because they did not recognize the biological meaning of the measures used, reports 24sata.hr.
"Many of the measures that are used, such as waist and hip measurements, blood pressure, cholesterol and triglycerides are markers of declining physical activity and obesity... So I believe that what is described in this index is highly associated with early midlife weight gain ", she explains.
Belsky, however, stands firmly behind his work.
"Whether weight gain is a sign of aging or a cause, the two measures of aging we studied, number of years and pace of aging, are more than weight gain," Belsky wrote in his detailed response.
After carefully reviewing and reanalyzing the data in light of Anna Newman's concerns, Belsky declares that the study was not 'fundamentally flawed', as Newman claims.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
