Control Your Genetics: A Deep Dive Into Epigenetic Testing, Biological Age Clocks, Longevity Protocols, Therapies & Supplementation

Nick Urban [00:00:07]:
Are you a high performer, obsessed with growth, and looking for an edge? Welcome to MINDBODY Peak Performance. Together, we’ll discover underground secrets to unlocking the full potential of your mind, body, and spirit. We’ll learn from some of the world’s leading minds, from ancient wisdom to cutting edge tools and everything in between. This is your host, Nick Urban. Enjoy the episode. Do your genes control your biological destiny, or are they just clues of what can happen if you don’t take any action? If you recall back in episode number 171, I interviewed doctor Tyler Panzner about why your genes are so important and how to get the most out of them. But that’s only one part of the picture. The other side is your lifestyle, everything that sits above your genome, aka what’s called epigenetics.

Nick Urban [00:01:09]:
In today’s episode, I sit down with Hannah Wendt from True Diagnostic to discuss the world of epigenetics and the impact of trauma, stress, diet, exercise, routines, and so much more on your biological age because it’s not just about the number of times you’re blowing out birthday candles but the quality of each of those years. Unlike genetics, your epigenetics change rapidly in response to lifestyle. So you can get a report card on how you’re living and whether or not you’re contributing to premature aging and, hopefully, not mortality. Today, we also go into some of the lesser discussed biohacks and longevity protocols, such as plasma exchange, low dose lithium, the impact of traumas, biological stressors, socioeconomic conditions, and how epigenetic methylation testing fits into your overall diagnostic plan. I ask Hannah how she stack ranks, things like annual blood labs and daily wearables and genetic testing and a whole lot more. So who is Hannah? Hannah Wendt is a biology graduate from the University of Kentucky with a passion for longevity and disruptive technologies. She has a background in cell signaling research and served as director of research and content for the International Peptide Society. In 2020, she founded TruDiagnostic, a company specializing in methylation based diagnostics for life extension and preventative health care, a personal favorite topic of mine.

Nick Urban [00:03:00]:
TruDiagnostic conducts extensive research with over 30 clinical trials and one of the world’s largest private epigenetic health databases, testing over 35,000 patients. Hannah also created Everything Epigenetics, a platform to discuss how lifestyle factors and DNA expression impact overall health. If you like this subject, you can go back and listen to the previous ones I’ve recorded with their cofounder of TruDiagnostic, Ryan Smith, episode number 82 47. You can grab a test for yourself on their website at trudiagnostic.com and use the code urban to save either 12 or 15%. From my extensive research into this world and consulting with a lot of the world’s leading experts, this is what I believe to be by far and away the most accurate and actionable epigenetic methylation test or really biological age test on the market. It’s what I use, and it’s what a lot of the top wellness influencers also use, the Brian Johnsons of the world who are spending $2,000,000 per year on their wellness routine, and it’s what powers the Rejuvenation Olympics. So if you’re interested in biological age testing, this is the company for you. You can find the show notes for everything we discuss, including the resources and discounts and all that, on the website show notes, which will be at mindbodypeak.com / the number 184.

Nick Urban [00:04:36]:
Alright. Without further ado, let’s bring in Hannah. Hannah, welcome to the podcast.

Hannah Went [00:04:43]:
Thanks, Nick. I’m happy to be here.

Nick Urban [00:04:45]:
I’m looking forward to this conversation because I’ve talked a bit about biological aging on the podcast previously with your, I believe, his cofounder, Ryan Smith. We recorded 2 episodes way back when back when I had first discovered you guys and was learning about this whole field, and I think things have evolved a lot since then.

Hannah Went [00:05:06]:
Yeah. Absolutely. I’m excited to dive into it maybe from a different lens or or a little bit deeper as well, update the audience, tell them what’s new and and what we should really be focusing on now.

Nick Urban [00:05:16]:
Perfect. Before we get started, what are the unusual nonnegotiables you’ve done so far today for your health, your performance, and your bio harmony?

Hannah Went [00:05:25]:
I actually did not follow my normal routine this morning. I’ll be honest. I had a cousin stay with me out of town, and we were up a little bit later. So didn’t hit the gym, didn’t do my meditation as normal, but I did make sure I was getting a lot of steps on my stand up desk or my walking desk. So that’s usually a nonnegotiable along with meditation and working out. But I obviously skipped those 2 this morning again if I’m being completely honest. I probably have, I don’t know, somewhere close to, like, 10 to 12000 steps already for today. So I always try to aim for more if I know I’m not lifting weights or doing any other type of activity later on in the day too.

Hannah Went [00:06:04]:
And water. Lots of water. I already had my water and my electrolytes today.

Nick Urban [00:06:08]:
You have me beat. I’m at 96165 steps currently so far today, so so good on you. For people who don’t know who you are, how would you summarize what you do?

Hannah Went [00:06:22]:
Who I am and what I do. Well, I think who I am and what I do are 2 separate questions, but you ask what I do. So I think it’s really interesting to talk about what people do daily. Right? You have maybe these these titles, like cofounder, director of clinical testing. It’s like, what do you actually do? What does that really mean? And I really spend my day to day speaking with, health care providers or our larger partners who are offering the true diagnostic products, specifically focusing on our biological age flagship product called True Age. So it can really range from onboarding health care providers and introducing them to the subject of why we’re measuring biological age and how we measure it through those epigenetic modifications to reviewing results with someone and how to really help them understand how this is super important and very clinically actionable. And there’s some other conversations to be had too in terms of how they can use this as a recurring revenue model or monetize this type of testing in their practice all the way to talking about fun studies and research opportunities as well. So that’s usually what I’m doing on on a day to day.

Hannah Went [00:07:34]:
And in podcasts like these, sometimes with a lot of people, I really enjoy the podcast as well.

Nick Urban [00:07:39]:
Well, you do everything epigenetics, which is also, I believe, the name of your platform. So will you break down for people who didn’t tune into the first episodes with Ryan Smith, what exactly is epigenetics and how does it relate to genetics?

Hannah Went [00:07:52]:
Yeah. Definitely. And you’re you’re right. I have Everything epigenetics, which is my separate company. Really, it’s an educational platform. So I host a biweekly, so every other week podcast, that’s mostly with health care providers on what is epigenetics, what does it mean more in the research round. Right? I was already having those conversations anyway, so I was like, I’ll just publish them too. It’s it’s fine.

Hannah Went [00:08:14]:
You know, I have a little website and whatnot. So that’s a a really fun thing I do on the side. But in terms of Fe genetics and what this actually means, Fe is just a Greek prefix that means above or on top of. So we’re quite literally looking on top of your genetic infrastructure. And your follow-up to that, Nick, was, well, how is it different to your genetics? Your genetics are your it’s your your, like, pure DNA code. Right? Your your, single nucleotide polymorphisms, meaning, these are your building blocks of your body. Think of it as almost your base layer. It’s your hardware.

Hannah Went [00:08:47]:
It’s not gonna change. It makes up about 20% of your entire phenotypic outcomes. However, your epigenetics actually express those genetic modifications. And one example I always like to use in in this case is I have a genetic predisposition for Alzheimer’s. So my brother’s in my family, my grandmother passed away from it, I have that particular SNP, the APOE 34, meaning I’m more likely to get it at a younger age and more likely to die from Alzheimer’s as well. That’s, like, really disheartening. Right? Like, I should be upset and sad about that, which I am to an extent, but I can’t do anything about it. Right? But from an epigenetic standpoint, there are actually things I could do to reduce that risk further.

Hannah Went [00:09:31]:
Meaning, you know, I can, take estrogen supplementation. I can, work on even lifestyle factors, small things that make a really, really huge difference in that expression of the APO 3 4 variant. So f a genetics is really 80% of all of your health outcomes. They’re changeable. They’re modifiable as well. It’s the software of your genetics or of that hardware.

Nick Urban [00:09:55]:
And so you said that genetics makes up about 20% of the outcomes, the phenotypic outcomes, and epigenetics is the 80%. Because I I see 2 different camps in this world. Some people are like, okay. It’s pretty much all genetics. And the other campus, it’s pretty much all epigenetics, and it seems like there’s the truth lies somewhere in between. So how do you determine if what you’re working on can be solved via epigenetics, your goal, your outcome, whatever it is, or it’s a genetic something that is better left? I mean, you don’t have as much ability to influence.

Hannah Went [00:10:30]:
Yeah. This is a good question. I think we would be super, super naive to say, hey. We just need to look at our genes. They’re responsible for most of the things in our lives, our our health outcomes. The reason I say that is because we have data behind it. And that data is gonna be the Human Genome Project that failed us quite traumatically, a while back. So the Human Genome Project is where scientists set out.

Hannah Went [00:10:53]:
They wanted to really measure the first human genome. They got 1,000 and thousands of samples. They really, really thought and, I mean, a lot of people thought, you know, probably myself included if I was old enough at the time to really sit and think through this. Logically, if we understand the human genome, then we’ll be able to solve for cancer, for Alzheimer’s, for cardiovascular disease, for all of these different type of outcomes. And it left people super, super frustrated. So if you even Google anything about, like, the Human Genome Project, the first thing that comes up is, like, scientists are angry. Right? We didn’t really even solve anything. We barely cracked the surface.

Hannah Went [00:11:28]:
Right? Those types of headlines. So, you know, I said 80% are really your epigenetics, 20% are your your genetics. I am definitely generalizing there. It’s gonna be specific to that particular, like, location. Right? So the AP 0 34, for example, is a really, really well studied gene. That gene may make up 80% of my health outcomes for Alzheimer’s, and maybe from an epigenetic standpoint, I can only control, like, 20% of it. Right? But we just don’t know. There has to be a lot more research into each specific individual gene, which would take a lot of time.

Hannah Went [00:12:03]:
But we just also know how important environment is. Right? Where you can have and you see this all the time, twins. Right? As as a as an example or as a study. You have one twin who lives in, you know, New York City. They’re a smoker. They’re a drinker. They stay out late, you know, big partier, and you have the the same twin living in, like, upstate New York and the Hamptons, like, doesn’t smoke, doesn’t party, doesn’t drink, and they would look vastly different and have very, very different health outcomes too. Their genetics is the same.

Hannah Went [00:12:33]:
Right? That’s not describing any of it. Their epigenetics are really what’s gonna be pushing, their health outcomes.

Nick Urban [00:12:39]:
I think that’s also not very surprising. It’s, like, you tell someone that, okay, if you live a healthy lifestyle, you’re gonna do better. It’s pretty intuitive, but it’s interesting to see the the twin studies affirming the same thing.

Hannah Went [00:12:52]:
Yes. Absolutely. It’s it’s, you know, super interesting, and, again, something, we’re learning a lot more about. There are a lot of twin kind of cohorts or or, you know, directories. Stanford has a really good one. That’s where we just did one of our last publications, which was the, twin study. It was looking at vegan versus omnivore diets in twins as well. And again, knowing they’re genetically the same, one twin well on omnivore diet, one twin well on the vegan diet.

Hannah Went [00:13:20]:
You know, what is the outcome? As it’s looking at, different blood based values, some of the biological age clocks, you know, what makes up those biological age clocks and kind of which trends we’re we’re seeing too.

Nick Urban [00:13:32]:
Yeah. I mean, one of the issues I see with research is that it’s looking at a higher level topic such as the foods that you choose to include and maybe the ones you choose to avoid, whether you’re an omnivore, a vegan, a carnivore, whatever it is. But then a lot of times, it’s not incorporating the other factors such as, like, when you’re eating or the way you’re eating. Like, are you eating high protein every day, or are you cycling between high protein one day, low protein the next day, same thing with carbohydrates and fats and all those? There’s so many other variables that it’s really hard to control for everything in research.

Hannah Went [00:14:06]:
Yes. Yeah. Definitely. That that study again, it was a really great study. It was, included in the documentary series, You Are What You Eat on Netflix. So it got a lot of press. And the study really wasn’t to say, hey. The vegan diet or omnivore diet slow aging, although the press definitely extrapolated that and, you know, twisted it, turned it, extrapolated all of these things.

Hannah Went [00:14:27]:
It was, you know, really just a discovery kind of type of study to start to get a little bit of data back, which is what the field needs. Right? We we definitely need a baseline for a lot of these randomized controlled clinical trials, which it was not a randomized controlled, clinical trial. But we need more of those. We need them in small scale. Right? We need them to be affordable. And then what we can do is actually measure or follow-up that same group 5, 10 years later down the line and see how they’re still performing today. So we still need to set up that infrastructure for those, like, maybe less powered, baseline studies first.

Nick Urban [00:15:03]:
I’m curious about your overall hierarchy of diagnostics and testing because it seems to me that it’s really important to know your genetics even if it doesn’t drive the majority of outcomes because that’s not gonna be changing throughout your lifetime. You test it once, and although our knowledge around the different snips and all that changes, like, we get more and we realize the greatest one is weighted higher, this one’s less important. But then also, like, before you layer on epigenetic stuff, it makes sense to have that baseline. Where do you put the different tests for overall health and wellness?

Hannah Went [00:15:34]:
Oh, good question. They’re they’re all so important. I mean, I’m obviously super biased. I’m at I, like, have to say, I’m going to say epigenetics, but, no, I I truly do think it’s still epigenetic. So, but again, knowing your genetics is great. It gives you a framework, I think, for how you probably should live your life. I’m actually getting my genetics done. I’ve had my 23 and me done historically.

Hannah Went [00:15:56]:
I don’t even, like, remember my login. I don’t have access to my account anymore. I have my raw data downloaded somewhere. But I’m actually getting my genetics retested, and should have the results. I haven’t even done the the testing. I haven’t received it in the mail, but should probably have the results back, I would say, in, like, 2 to 3 weeks or so with a pretty in-depth panel I’m doing. So I’m really, really excited, to see how that comes back because I wanna make some changes. So for example, I remember when I I tested my genetics previously, I can really go crazy with, healthy saturated fats.

Hannah Went [00:16:30]:
I mean, I, you know, they told me, the coach that was interpreting it was telling me I could pour, like, olive oil on an avocado and just eat that, like, daily, which I I would probably do. Like, I love olive oil. I love avocados. I could also, have, you know, a lot of coffee throughout the day. So I’m able to metabolize caffeine really, really well. Caffeine can still make me feel a little bit, like, jittery. I love coffee. So I really only stick to, like, 1 cup a day.

Hannah Went [00:16:58]:
That’s it. But, so you so I’m giving you these specific examples because you can start to see how they’re almost like what you should base your life on. Right? Some people have, like, predispositions that make their body negatively react to gluten, for example. So maybe you wanna cut out gluten in your diet as well. So I’m really using this as a baseline to say, okay, what should I probably eat or start to use as as guidelines? Right? How could I optimize my my DNA from, like, a cellular level? Are is there anything else I need to know from nutrition based standpoint, physical fitness standpoint, you know, oxidative stress, maybe mitochondrial based health as well, even, I said nutrition, fitness, yet sleep, stress. Yeah. I mentioned too. So, those are kind of the main four categories I I go by.

Hannah Went [00:17:50]:
I know I have the the one particular gene too that, where I’d like I’m I don’t know that I’m hungry. Right? Like, I overeat satiety? Satiety. I’m saying that incorrectly. But essentially, yeah. Right? Like like, I’m prone to, like, overeating. So again, you know, drinking water before your meal, like, taking a break after UVN, and kind of understanding how, like, full, you are and and what that actually feels like. So I would say genetics is still pretty important, but, again, it’s not gonna change. Like, my my genetic genetic levels are are the way it is.

Hannah Went [00:18:24]:
So in terms of clinical utility, it’s

Nick Urban [00:18:27]:
Well, why limit. If it doesn’t change, why are you retesting then?

Hannah Went [00:18:31]:
I just I don’t remember my results. I don’t have my my raw data file. I don’t know where it is. Like, yeah, I lost it. I don’t know where it is. So, I’m just retesting. But great question. Right? You shouldn’t have to retest if you remember to be organized and keep all your files and stuff, which I haven’t done.

Nick Urban [00:18:46]:
Yeah. Well, I’d be really interested to see if your results would change at all. I would hope they wouldn’t. I’d assume they wouldn’t, but that could be a a red flag if you uploaded a result couple years later and you see big differences.

Hannah Went [00:18:59]:
Oh, yeah. You know, so 2 different companies too. So, the 23 andMe, has, you know, a different interpretation, and then I’m doing it with another company called Wild Health. And and they focus on genomics personalized medicine. So, again, from a genomic testing standpoint, like 98% of companies who do genomic testing, they’re all looking at the same positions. Right? What’s gonna be different is the interpretation to an extent. Not different in terms of telling you 2 different things, but maybe saying the same thing in a little bit of a different way, so to speak.

Nick Urban [00:19:33]:
Okay. So you have genetics. There’s that. You also have epigenetics. Where would you put something like blood labs?

Hannah Went [00:19:38]:
Blood labs probably first. Yeah. I think blood labs would probably fall first. So getting my bloods redone next week. I’m gonna do it on on Tuesday. I usually do that every 6 to 12 months as well. But again, those are just the gold standard. Right? In terms of biomarkers, which are super predictive of health outcomes.

Hannah Went [00:19:56]:
However, I think unless you’re very well trained and versed in new kind of functional medicine and reading blood based biomarkers, I wouldn’t trust a GP to disinterpre those markers. Right? So I have a a longevity health care provider who, you know, reads the latest greatest research on these lab values and understands exactly what they mean. I have even my, like, requisition form, like, right here. So this proves I’m gonna go to to lab before and, you know, get it all done. So again, uric acid, h b o n c, vitamin b 12, folate, ferritin hormones, you know, some some other b vitamins, IGF 1, CBC, the life of protein little a is is super important now. Right? And I actually don’t think I’ve, that was a concern, because that can be, out of range when you have that risk for Alzheimer’s too, actually, I believe. So, that was one of the concerns, and I don’t think I’ve ever actually gotten that measured before. So lab values, super important.

Nick Urban [00:20:56]:
Yeah. It’s it’s hard to stack rank everything because, like, you could be having slightly out of balance, say, LDL or something like that because you have a genetic predisposition towards it, and it may means you’ll need a little more care in that department. And you might be what the general lab markers show as normal when it’s actually slightly out of optimal. And if you don’t know that going in, maybe you’ll find it you’ll notice it after years of continuously testing and refining and tweaking your diet, but maybe not. And it’s helpful just I like genetics. You can see the areas. Okay. Like, I need a little more focus here, a little less focus here so you can allocate your resources accordingly.

Hannah Went [00:21:35]:
Yeah. Yes. You’re you’re exactly right. So, again, you you can use them together. Right? You can start to kinda paint that picture of your health. And I think genetics is important because it also talks it also shows you your family predispositions. Right? Like, what to look out for, what to, like, be a little bit more weary about. But again, also, you can’t use it as an excuse.

Hannah Went [00:21:55]:
Right? Because your epigenetics are gonna be the controlled part. So I would say, I if I had to rank the order top, like, top to bottom and be the blood based values, as long as you are getting the correct things tested and as long as you’re having someone interpret those, for you and you know those optimal ranges and the most up to date research. Secondarily, again, would be the epigenetics because, aging is the number one risk factor for all cause mortality morbidity. So if you have that increased age, there are really really easy simple things you can do right away to start to bring that down. And you’re gonna bring that down by optimizing lab values, and then thirdly, understanding your genetic predispositions and optimizing those as well. So when we say we’re taking action for the genetic predispositions we have, essentially, we’re working on our epigenome. Right? The expression levels of those genes. What we’re what we do have control in.

Nick Urban [00:22:45]:
One thing I don’t like about blood labs is they are definitely just a snapshot in time. If I have one bad night of sleep before I go in, I’m thinking about what my blood results are gonna be. I don’t sleep as well. I get, like, an hour or 2 less sleep than usual. I could go in and see drastically different results than I live 95% of the time just because of that one day. And there are certain lab markers that are more resistant to that because they’re long term averages, but a lot of them are more volatile, and they fluctuate tremendously. And then there’s also, like, the different, like, hormones in the body and stuff like that unless you’re doing a Dutch test or something that accounts for that variation. Like, even the time of day you go into the lab, whether it’s 9 AM or 11 AM or 2 PM, that can give you very different results.

Nick Urban [00:23:27]:
So I’m I’m also curious how often people get a false sense of doom from their their lab workers.

Hannah Went [00:23:35]:
The valid, you know, valid concern. Last time I did my labs, I did the Dutch test. I’ll probably never do that again because it was awful peeing on those cards. And, like, all the things you could’ve need that actually sucks those results. I’m like, like, what am I doing? If if I’m like, I’m very detail oriented. I feel like I pay attention to instructions. Like, it was even hard for me to follow. I couldn’t imagine the person who just, like, doesn’t read instructions very well and, like, follow things along.

Hannah Went [00:24:00]:
And, yeah, just an interesting test overall. But again, I had some good, you know, findings from it, your DHEA, your cortisol levels, a more in-depth panel of of your hormones. I’m gonna be doing my labs, Tuesday morning, 8 AM, right when they open, fasted, of course. I will not be working out the day before. I will not be working out the day of, so I’m really trying to balance everything. Weirdly enough, I’ve always been, like, such a good sleeper. It’s the one thing I brag about. I used to have a whoop and I used to track it, but I even knew I was such a great sleeper before, like, tracking it.

Hannah Went [00:24:33]:
So sleep has never been like an issue for me. I think the issue again comes back to the core root of these lab markers. Right? And and, you know, true diagnostic work, CLIA certified lab, meaning we follow the rules, regulations as it relates to, like, laboratory processing and standardization. Same with LabCorp and Quest, they’re CLIA certified labs as well. CLIA certified labs legally can have up to a 20% variance within the metrics they are reporting. We don’t we don’t have that for our biological age test. We publish on this, the the precision values, But that is crazy. That has been so insane to say.

Hannah Went [00:25:11]:
And, actually, it’s really funny because if you work with our, like, top health care providers in, like, New York City, you know, Miami, LA, people who are seeing, like, celebrities, they’ll actually take it’s hard to control for time of day, but you wanna be at least consistent when you’re, like, actually giving the labs. They’ll actually take a lot of blood from the patient. They’ll aliquot it into, like they’ll do 3 of the same draws for LabCorp, and then 3 of the same draws for LifeQuest, and do, like, averages of that. I know. Isn’t that crazy? Obviously, like, can’t do that. Right? But I think what’s most important to follow, if you are someone like myself or, like, average consumer who can only do these tests like once, it’s seeing where your trend is going. Right? The the before and the after, and that’s important with, like, your your epigenetic test too. That’s the why epigenetics is such a good biomarker, Nick, is because it’s more of a running average of the 3 to 6 past months because of it’s so stable, but it’s also able to be changeable too.

Hannah Went [00:26:15]:
So, like, our DNA methylation CRP is way better. It’s more reliable, the epigenetic CRP compared to your traditional CRP testing, which may, you know, go up and down. It’s gonna vary from, like, stress, if you’re drinking coffee, things like that. And I know they say, you know, really you can still drink black coffee, that won’t break your fats, but I’m just doing water. And then I’ll, like, go get myself a bagel or treat myself to breakfast somewhere.

Nick Urban [00:26:40]:
Yes. Okay. So we’ve established now that blood labs can be misleading if you’re not getting it done thoroughly and regularly, and you’re not seeing the long term trend. Because if you get 20% underreporting one time and then 20% overreporting the next time, it can look like there’s a real issue when there might not, and it’s just a it’s just the nature of the lab processing and everything. And I’ve heard plenty of stories where people send their results into different labs, and they get the same sample, very different results from that. So there’s also then, of course, the things that people are probably already doing or listening in, such as wearables. Are you a fan of of incorporating those somewhere into the diagnostic routine?

Hannah Went [00:27:23]:
Not really. Not just me. That’s my personal opinion. Who knows? It probably doesn’t mean much. I had a WHOOP. I was gifted it through a group who, you know, had a WhatsApp around it, would sit out and do, like, challenges and thing. I love that group. They’re called Asp Scotch.

Hannah Went [00:27:41]:
If you haven’t heard of them, check them out. They are basically a group of peep of life finding people, like, entrepreneurs, people who really want to focus on their their health and the optimization there. And they do that through, like, WHOOP as one of their offerings. And it’s really fun to start to like compare scores and again motivate each other and create this community around the wearable. That I really loved. I really loved that community. What I didn’t love is I felt like I was just so obsessed with it. Like, so obsessed with tracking it, like, wanting to look at it, like, understanding where I was, which, again, I think is good to an extent, but I’m just the type of person that was like, oh, I just, you know, worked my butt off in the gym doing all this weight lifting and, like, my I forget what the score is called.

Hannah Went [00:28:26]:
The fitness score or whatever it is for the day is at, like, 2. And I’m like so I feel like I had, like, sprint on the treadmill to get that score to go up. And I was also lazy. I didn’t input, like, my weights into the app or anything. Like, when I go to the gym, I don’t wanna be on my phone. I don’t look at my phone. I think it’s important to, you know, get in, get out, be focused on, like, what you want to achieve, and also to optimize your time in that way. Really interesting insights for sleep.

Hannah Went [00:28:52]:
Recovery was, like, super insightful too. So what I thought was really cool and probably my favorite part of the wearable, although I don’t use them anymore, was it could, like, tell when I was gonna get sick. Right? Or, like, when I was traveling. Like, I would look at it. I would still feel okay. Maybe, like, a little bit under the weather, and then, like, my recovery score would be so low. And yeah. It it was just, like, amazing.

Hannah Went [00:29:12]:
The next day then I would be so sick and I’d be able to, like, let off the gas a little bit and really relax, because I do feel like I’m, you know, such a high functioning individual. And my HRV sucks. So I also learned that. It’s just, like, pretty consistently low. So it did help me maybe push with, like, meditation, you know, some stress reduction techniques and, you know, breathing, techniques and stuff as well. But I mean, I’ve just never been a, like, consistent user of the wearable. Don’t have a Apple Watch. Have never tried the Oura ring.

Hannah Went [00:29:41]:
I’ve been I would be curious to try an Oura ring, I think. My use has been that again, I can’t, like, lift weights with it, really. I know it it does a really good job at sinking to your cycle for women. So I’ve heard really good results for that. I think that’d be really, really interesting, how it’s taking your temperature again across time, not necessarily a point in time, so it can help there.

Nick Urban [00:30:10]:
I wanna go back to the field of epigenetics now and how this factors into the broader landscape of biological age because I’ve heard commentary that epigenetics is only one of the hallmarks of aging. It’s probably not as important as some people are saying it. These are all things I’ve heard. And that there a true biological age measurement should incorporate a bunch of things in addition to just epigenetics.

Hannah Went [00:30:37]:
Yeah. Yeah. That’s a great point. I love that you brought us that question. So why is epigenetics different from other biological age folks, in terms of, you know, its popularity. Right? You see all of these biological age companies popping up and usually they’re they’re doing it through some type of epigenetic measurement. Well, the point in biological age clocks are really to predict the future. Right? It’s just a biomarker.

Hannah Went [00:31:03]:
Just a biomarker like we’ve been talking about, whether it’s like HRV, whether it’s your HbA 1c, your cholesterol markers. The point of a biomarker though is to predict the future. Right? So the question we should ask ourselves is, how predictive is a biomarker of x y z disease? Or, like, death in this case, because the biological age quarks are really good at prediction of even death itself. And when you compare actually true diagnostics, biological age clocks to any that are currently out there and available or to any other, like, biological age test, like grip strength test, gait speed test, glycan age, telomere length test, you know, all of the above, it is the most predictive, and that’s actually measured by hazard ratios. So, basically, it’s saying again, if you look at your epigenetics with the most accuracy, certainty, reliability, if we’re able to predict disease just better. Now, why epigenetics though? Like, what why? Why does it do so much better? Well, it actually incorporates other factors of aging and how the algorithms are actually trained. So, Nick, for example, our omic MH we created with Harvard about a year ago, look doesn’t look just look at epigenetics. It reports out through the lens of epigenetics using epigenetics as a surrogate per se.

Hannah Went [00:32:31]:
But in the training, we actually measured clinical lab values. We measured a lot of metabolites. We measured a lot of proteins. And then we’re just using all that information together with the DNA methylation or epigenetics, and then regressing them against the epigenetics to report out the biological age. So, you know, that’s what we call a 2nd generation epigenetic biological age talk. A first generation would be just if you are using epigenetics, right, in chronological age. And those were like, yes. Of course.

Hannah Went [00:33:04]:
They’re not great. They’re only looking at one thing. Right? We need to better power these clocks with other underlying biological information or reasons as to why we’re aging. Because to your point, aging is so complicated. Right? We had 9 hallmarks of aging. Now we have, like, 12 or 13. There’s articles all the time saying, no. The microbiome should be a function of hallmark of aging.

Hannah Went [00:33:27]:
Right? So there’s really no agreement on that. I think it’s it’s, depends who you ask. Right?

Nick Urban [00:33:34]:
That makes sense. And so that’s one of your newer clocks, and it’s cool. I didn’t realize that it’s incorporating other endpoints from the samples. But, like, when I submit my first sample to you guys over 2 years ago, I didn’t like, this technology wasn’t around yet. So how did you guys how are you able to run it through your new algorithm to get these scores?

Hannah Went [00:33:55]:
Oh, it’s a project. People don’t know, like, the behind the scenes, but it was such a project. It’s something we started when we first opened. And and, you know, we really had the idea behind true diagnostic at the end of 2019. We ran our first sample in July of 2020, but we weren’t satisfied with what was out there. We knew these had to be better. So since we opened, our goal was to make the best biological age clock that was ever created to date. And, you know, there are some models out there that we followed and then basically kind of superpower them, right, with with even more data and and information.

Hannah Went [00:34:30]:
But we’re we’re able to update your results. For example, you you took the test a long time ago. This wasn’t available when you first took the test because we have just that wrong data file. Right? So, essentially, we don’t have to measure you again. We just run that raw data file through our new interpretation or algorithms. Now if your sample from 2 years ago is gonna be outdated. Right? So we wanna we want to definitely get you a a new kit, send you one. We’ll have to do that.

Hannah Went [00:34:54]:
That way you can retest and and see. It’s a little bit hard, right, when you’re not doing it consistently. I love what you said about the wearable. Like, hey, once you know your body, you don’t have to wear it. You don’t have to do it as much. Same with the epigenetics. Like, if you’re really wanna wanting to optimize life, speed, and health span your aging, probably wanna take the test every 3 to 4 months even to make sure you’re going and you’re heading in the right direction. Once you start to stabilize, every 6 months, I think is great for maintenance.

Hannah Went [00:35:23]:
If, like, this is one of your main goals in life is to increase lifespan and health span, every 6 months would probably be preferable. But if you really were like, okay, I feel like I understand my body. I don’t wanna test the interventions anymore, like, I I really like my lifestyle and what I’m doing, and I’m holding myself accountable in that way. Then once a year, I think, is is totally acceptable.

Nick Urban [00:35:44]:
And I don’t think I’ve told you this, but I actually have, like, 5 different biological age tests this year. And later, after I’m no longer recovering from a little back injury, I plan on running them all at the same time to see how the different results compare and contrast. And I was going to do the current one this current round sooner before this interview, but I, as I mentioned, hurt my back. And I’m wondering how, like, life occurrences, whether it’s hurting your back or getting sick or major life stressors, how those would impact your results, I’m imagining pretty dramatically.

Hannah Went [00:36:18]:
Did you get surgery or anything like that on your back? Okay. No surgery. Okay. Good. Good. Well, that’s yeah. That’s good first and foremost. But, the reason I asked is because yeah.

Hannah Went [00:36:28]:
I’ll I’ll come to the point I’m trying to make here soon. But essentially, it does make a difference. Right? These different stressors that you have in your body. There was a paper that came out outside of Harvard, by doctor Jesse Puganek out of doctor Vadim Glaty Shev’s lab, which is like one of the world’s top leading aging labs, and they looked at different stressors. Now they were pretty extreme stressors. They were severe COVID 19. They were elected and unelected surgeries, which is why I asked, and then also pregnancy, as well. So what they did is they essentially looked at the biological age clocks and they asked the question, how do these stressors affect them? And what they saw is extreme increases upon that stressor.

Hannah Went [00:37:15]:
What was to follow though was really, really impressive, which again, depending on the stressor, it could be 2, 3, 6 months. You actually saw the reversal of those biological h clocks back to baseline or even better too. Yeah. So the effects are transient, which is positive. Right? Our our body has a healing mechanism. Also, like, a little bit of acute stress. It’s great. It means you have a purpose.

Hannah Went [00:37:38]:
It means you, like, care about something, But it’s more of that, like, chronic stress over time that’s really gonna start to wear and tear, on the body and affect the biological ages. So, yeah, depending on how long you’ve been out or, again, the intensity of the injury, that would determine how long you would you would want to wait.

Nick Urban [00:37:56]:
Okay. Yeah. And if someone gets sick too, how long do you recommend waiting? Like, what are the if you had a perfect protocol, how would you make sure that people are using this test most effectively?

Hannah Went [00:38:07]:
I probably would say 3 months is is super safe, unless there’s, like, a catastrophic based event. You can look in that paper. I’ll send it to you afterwards if you wanna link it, but it’s just called biological ages increased upon stress and were stored upon recovery, is is the name. But I can send it to you. That way people can look at those exact timelines. But, yeah, you know, pregnancy, like, if you’re breastfeeding, you probably wanna wait a lot longer. Right? So, there are just a lot of factors involved. But I would say, you know, if you have a mild, like, cold, flu, a little type of sickness, 3 months is probably plenty.

Nick Urban [00:38:39]:
I asked because for my last test, I was sick, I wanna say, the week before I had it done, and I definitely saw the results on my blood biomarkers because I also did labs at the same time. And then also, I’m thinking that I see them reflected on the true diagnostic reports I have that we’ll discuss in a minute. Before we get into that, I’d love to know what you do based on this data you get back to personalize your own health and wellness routine?

Hannah Went [00:39:10]:
Oh, a lot, actually. And, again, this is what makes it so fun now with the improvements we’ve made in our recent biological age clocks. So, now we can tell you the why or the how you’re aging. Right? So within that omic MH, we have these outcomes called epigenetic biomarker proxies or EBPs, where again, we can actually report out clinical lab values, metabolites, or proteins through the lens of DNA methylation and epigenetics. So interestingly enough, the EBP set come back a little bit higher for me or out of range, I should say, higher or lower depending on what GBP it is and what direction you want it to go, were more related to, like, insulin sensitivity, which is super, super interesting. Like, I don’t have a family history of, you know, type 2 diabetes. My grandpa, who is, like, extremely healthy, golfs every day, is, 84. He does eat sweets, like, doesn’t pay too much attention to his diet.

Hannah Went [00:40:05]:
He’s, like, edging the prediabetic line now. Like, that’s the only kind of family connection I have there. So I’m thinking I’m getting, like, a little bit of insulin sensitivity or a little bit, insulin resistant based issues. So I haven’t done it yet. I’m waiting for my bloodbath to come back and to look at them just to, like, you know, also see how they’re doing. But I wanna do a CGM, like a 2 inches glucose monitor, as well. So I’ll probably do that because, again, you I’m waiting on my labs because I’m just curious. But, again, even if your labs say they’re okay, your epigenetics could still be out of range because they’re detecting that in earlier signal.

Hannah Went [00:40:39]:
Right? So I’m really interested. I wanna do a CGM, definitely. You know, we also even dive into individual systems too. So, like, my symphony age report, my hormone age is super high, and that’s powered by IGF ones and DHEAs. So I’m really interested and curious to look, and dive a little bit deeper, into my hormone based panel that I’m gonna get on my lab results as well. The Daniekden pace. So Daniekden pace, my pace of aging score, I always like to keep it below 1, of course. And, I do a pretty good job at actually restricting calories.

Hannah Went [00:41:11]:
Like, that’s usually a non negotiable I do every day as well. It’s just naturally, like, restricting about 10% of my caloric, intake levels, and that can help move that Danube and paste lower. The dynein and paste, again, in all of these markers I’m talking about are truly predictive of disease states, and and death itself if they’re if they’re elevated. So, again, really just it it’s a way to put something on paper that’s tangible and say, I have to make a difference, or this is where I’m heading. Right? Because these markers are predicting the future as I’ve I’ve echoed, and and as we’ve we’ve talked about. So those are the main aging ones. I mean, we even go over your immune cell subset system where we may say you’re deficient in, like, vitamin g, zinc, and you need to boost your immune cell system. We have a really cool physical fitness age where it gives you information on your b o two max, your f b b one grip strength and gait speed.

Hannah Went [00:42:02]:
So we could actually tell you, hey, you look a little poor in your aerobic based exercises, which is where most people fall short because no one wants to do aerobic based exercises. No one wants to jog or, you know, swim or cycle. Right? Be at that, like, higher intensity level for a longer period of time. So that’s that’s quite funny when people get those results back. Again, it it measures your behavior, pay or patient’s behavior, makes you take a look inward and reflect on that.

Nick Urban [00:42:32]:
Oh, cool. I know from previous research that a lot of the older clocks, perhaps some of the other new ones too, actually used your calendar chronological age as one of the variables when they were training the the model and running the calculations. And to me, that doesn’t make any sense because it’s, like, defeating the whole purpose of running that. You can’t use the same variable for both the dependent and and independent variable.

Hannah Went [00:42:57]:
That’s a great point. I think, you know, these the 1st generation clocks where you’re describing were so really great when they came out. They were a huge discovery. Like, I wasn’t at that conference when people just you basically saw, hey, DNA methylation, epigenetics can predict chronological age, Our correlation value of above 0.99, people said, like, their jaw dropped to the floor. You just don’t see those correlations in science. So, obviously, there is something very, very special there. And even those 1st generation clocks are better at predicting all cause mortality, morbidity than your chronological agents stand alone. But they act weird.

Hannah Went [00:43:31]:
And by weird, I mean, they increase with things like caloric restriction. They increase with things like synolytic therapy. Again, they’re not as reliable. They can have up to a 30% variance, meaning you can have up to an 18 year delta in either direction when you take the same sample and run, you know, the same algorithm on that sample. So there are a lot of limitations within those. What you get is why there is a need for the, research and development, the improvements within the clocks within the 2nd generations, such as our omic MH, the symphony age, and then, you have your generation 3 which is the Dunedin PACE.

Nick Urban [00:44:06]:
I’m curious what outcomes with therapies, interventions are you seeing that have the best overall effect on true diagnostic members? Like, are you seeing anything in particular, especially anything that’s counterintuitive? Like, of course, if you’re sleeping better, you’re reducing stress, you’re moving more, those are all gonna help. But, like, what are you seeing that’s really moving the needle and or surprising?

Hannah Went [00:44:29]:
On the day we’re recording this, we’ll have a a paper published with Yale, actually, looking at over 75 clinical interventional trials, 20 of them. About 20, 25 of them coming directly from true diagnostic, and looking at all the epigenetic clocks on those clinical trials and looking at what looks the best, what’s moving the needle, what’s not. And interestingly enough, our algorithms are really, really great at, without saying too much, are really, really great at capturing lifestyle and pharmacological treatment changes. You know, supplements, we’re not seeing them be super statistically significant. One of the big takeaways of that paper too, which again makes sense. I don’t think this is will be too surprising for anyone. The worse off you are, right, the worse your health is, like, the more you’re gonna be able to make a change with that biological age too. Right? That’s where the supplements come in.

Hannah Went [00:45:20]:
That’s where everything comes in. But I think as a society, we just want the quick fix. Right? We want the one pill, the one size fits all. You know, we want the GLP one to lose weight. Right? We’re we’re not willing to really change our habitual routines for the life that we want to live. It’s an interesting paradigm, to think about that. Because, again, we’re seeing lifestyle changes really move the needle the most and then medication based changes. And, again, you have to take that into consideration in terms of, like, the population we’re studying.

Hannah Went [00:45:52]:
Some of them were HIV positive populations with the intra retro, like, viral therapy. So, again, you still have to take each into its own account. But, I guess, to directly answer your question, there was a paper also published out of the Buck Institute, pretty recently looking at the therapeutic plasma exchange, and they looked at about 30 biological age clocks, including the ones from True Diagnostic, and they saw, like, a 2.61 year reduction in the biological age clocks too. Again, probably not a huge surprise like we thought that, you know, therapeutic plasma exchange, you know, probably made a difference. It’s a very popular procedures that, is popping up at longevity clinics nowadays. But to have the data on that is super important. Because, again, it’s hard to move these metrics. Like, it’s not as easy as people think.

Hannah Went [00:46:39]:
Right? So to see a multiyear age reversal even within the TPE, you know, I think really will push people to think or start to challenge, oh, I really do need to make changes to my lifestyle or even to see a larger effect.

Nick Urban [00:46:52]:
And you’re right. That makes sense that if you’re unhealthy, you’re gonna see the biggest gains from really implementing any of the lifestyle or medication or supplemental things. And if you’re already pretty healthy, you’re gonna see less of an impact because you’re already pretty healthy and your rate of aging, pace of aging is lower.

Hannah Went [00:47:09]:
Yeah. Yeah. Definitely. I think another cool one, we just had a health care provider email us about this one the other day. We ran kind of an internal analysis too. It’s like lithium supplementation. It’s interesting. Yeah.

Hannah Went [00:47:19]:
I just had a a podcast go out, talking about this with doctor Gabriel, Friese. And, he’s out of Texas and he studies suicidal behavior, other type of kind of neurocognitive issues happening in the brain and, like, schizophrenia even, multi personality disorder, and lithium usually helps with those type of disorders, but we also actually see the clocks rewind when you’re taking lithium as well. You know, due to kind of affecting that molecular aging process within the cell itself. So that one’s yeah. That one will be interesting to study and and follow-up on.

Nick Urban [00:48:00]:
That is an entire rabbit hole that I wanted to briefly go down with you. But lithium tends to be one of the minerals that’s more prevalent in certain waters around the world that are often associated with longevity. It tends to be low dose lithium, and I like low dose lithium. I’m not sure if I wanna use a higher dose of it for other reasons. But what are you seeing in terms of I don’t know if that study looked into low dose lithium at all or if it was only, like, clinical dosages, higher dosages. And then also the the the rabbit hole is around the blue zones in general. What your thoughts are on those?

Hannah Went [00:48:35]:
Yeah. It would it would be low dose lithium. Absolutely. So so to answer that question there, the blue zones are so fun. They’re so great. They’re interesting to learn about. I think they create really awesome populations that we can study, and and look at. I think it’s missing a bigger picture though.

Hannah Went [00:48:52]:
My hot take on it is there are also other areas in the world who are under extreme poverty. Right? That aren’t necessarily in a blue zone. So I’m thinking, like, there are particular areas or regions in Costa Rica where people tend to live, like, super super long, but they’re under extreme poverty and don’t follow, like, blue zones. You know, I would say I I’m not saying that they’re, you know, super well off by any means as as well, but I I’d like to just understand the difference, I think, between other populations that that live really long too. Right? And and what’s the connection there? Because the blue zone is just one example. My also other hot take is usually when people ask me that. They’re like, oh, you know, the blue sounds. They drink a lot of wine, you know, they eat a lot of carbs.

Hannah Went [00:49:42]:
They do all these things. Like, I can do those too. And I’m like, great. Well, you also work, you know, 80 plus hours a week. Right? You, have not worked on your childhood trauma. You’re stressed out all the time. You are, you know, emotionally unavailable, and you’re chugging bottles of crappy wine and, you know, eating a Domino’s pizza. So I’m like, no.

Hannah Went [00:50:04]:
You know, we’re not the same as the blue zone diet, or or the blue zone, you know, areas as well.

Nick Urban [00:50:10]:
I like what you were saying that looking at the other longevity hotspots around the world outside of the blue zones, the ones where the data wasn’t necessarily cherry picked to conform around a story.

Hannah Went [00:50:22]:
Yeah. Exactly right. Yeah.

Nick Urban [00:50:24]:
You mentioned trauma, and there’s the, obviously, the the capital t, traumas that are, like, the things that everyone would would consider traumas. There’s also the traumatic experiences that we all experience differently. Are you seeing any impact on biological aging from not just the capital t traumas, but the more minor events that

Hannah Went [00:50:42]:
Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, childhood trauma has a huge effect on on biological aging. There are a lot of association based papers, even, like, you know, socioeconomic status at the childhood level, even at the neighborhood level or at the childhood level within the family level and the neighborhood level. You know, that’s something, you know, we as children may have never known. Right? That can even have effect on on your biological aging too. So a 100%. I think, yeah, that’s that’s a huge, you know, more people are talking about it nowadays, which is great.

Hannah Went [00:51:17]:
Like, I I think a lot more people go to therapy. I think it’s something that is, like, less taboo. I think, you know, more people are talking about it openly on pot hats or even with their friends. There’s more of like that mental health side of things. Right? That can have, again, a huge out outcome on outlook on your your biological AG too. Even there’s even studies, like, even the way we talk to ourselves. Right? Whether you have an internal monologue or not. I think everyone has that to some extent.

Hannah Went [00:51:44]:
Not like the consistent internal monologue, but saying, like like, if I hung up off after this podcast, I was like, oh my god. Why did I say that? That’s that was so awful. Like, should I message Nick to to remove it? And, like, if I just go about my day and I just think about that all weekend and I’m, like, beating myself up about it, like, that’s gonna negatively affect my gene expression. But if I’m like, oh, I messed up. I learned from it. That’s cool. No biggie. No one else has a microscope on me.

Hannah Went [00:52:12]:
They’re not even gonna notice it, and just like brush it off and move on. That’s gonna have a positive effect on your epigenetic expression level. So, it is really, yeah, crazy, how, you know, maybe these more like minuscule interactions or, you know, things we don’t consciously, right, do, are gonna have an effect on on the aging process.

Nick Urban [00:52:33]:
I think also having a very clear north star or sense of direction, like, where you’re trying to go and, like, your reason for even wanting to live a long time with a great health span, that’s gonna be probably more impactful than some supplements that have been studied in cell cultures, but never translated anywhere beyond that.

Hannah Went [00:52:51]:
Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. I I think too I think that’s a great point to bring up.

Nick Urban [00:52:55]:
Well, I have my last test results in front of me. I think it’d be fun to quickly go through these and see if you have any insights and what you would do if you were in my shoes to optimize these results.

Hannah Went [00:53:12]:
Yeah. So this looks good. I know you mentioned you may have been a little bit sick at the time. So this is our omic m h. It looks like you’re 8 years younger than your calendar age, which is crazy. That’s that’s a really, really good result. Most men age faster too. Right? They’re older.

Hannah Went [00:53:30]:
Biologically, they die younger compared to women. So this is really impressive. You’re doing better than 92% of, people at your of men at your same chronological age.

Nick Urban [00:53:41]:
At least in August of 2022. So Right.

Hannah Went [00:53:43]:
Right. You need to retest?

Nick Urban [00:53:45]:
Yeah.

Hannah Went [00:53:46]:
Because, you know, you you said you were sick, like, the day after you took it or something like that. Right?

Nick Urban [00:53:52]:
Before.

Hannah Went [00:53:53]:
You may have not seen, you know, the effect on this quite yet. But even your, you know, systems age looks good. All of your agents

Nick Urban [00:54:00]:
I think I think we see it here under my blood. My blood is was older than my chronological age.

Hannah Went [00:54:06]:
Blood is low chronic. Yeah. That would mean, you know, the blood is gonna be made up of a lot of factors that you’re measuring on, like, a CBC panel as well. Does anyone in your family you know, you don’t understand this out loud, but, you know, that is most predictive of, like, particular, like, blood diseases and cancers, leukemia, particular outcomes too. Not saying, like, you’re gonna have any of those. But some people who do, like, have like, you need to think about, you know, your whole whole health, family health, things like that as well. Barely. You’re barely older.

Hannah Went [00:54:40]:
You’re, like, right as a halfway.

Nick Urban [00:54:42]:
Yeah. Well, there there’s no instances of blood cancers and blood disorders as far as I’m aware. Okay. And then the rest looks pretty normal within range.

Hannah Went [00:54:54]:
Mhmm.

Nick Urban [00:54:56]:
Pace of aging. Back when I interviewed interviewed Ryan, he mentioned this was point 8 was pretty slow. But now these days, I see I hear a point 6 something, so I guess I I’m no longer in the on the leaderboard.

Hannah Went [00:55:09]:
Right. Right. Yes. We’ll have to get you on the leaderboard, get you retested and consented if you wanna join. And then that’s all that’s on this report. So this report is solely focusing on the aging. So the omic MAH is simply agent that you need to pace, which again looks great.

Nick Urban [00:55:23]:
Okay.

Hannah Went [00:55:23]:
This is just a different format. So, you know, if you keep scrolling, we have your immune cell subset, we have that fitness age, and and other things that we can offer.

Nick Urban [00:55:32]:
This right here, you can see my my blood age was a year older than my yeah. My blood age here is also a bit older. Immune system age is a bit older. That probably was related to being sick.

Hannah Went [00:55:45]:
Mhmm. Yeah. Definitely.

Nick Urban [00:55:46]:
And for anyone listening in, we’ll put I’ll put a link to my report in the show notes so you can check it out if you’re curious how this looks. And also a link to my follow-up when I when I take it.

Hannah Went [00:55:57]:
Yeah. So this is just going into oh, you’re you’re on the report that’s going into the individual, systems. Yeah. The Symphony age report. So you’re getting your percentiles for, you know, each of the individual, scoring as well. Which again, look really really good. This is probably like one of the best I’ve seen. I mean, you’re in, like, 14 percentile, 24th percentile, 46 for kidney, hearts, 25th.

Nick Urban [00:56:21]:
46 is good.

Hannah Went [00:56:22]:
46 is a little higher. But for, like, most part on average, right, you’re doing, like, super, super well. You’re kind of combined score, of all of these together is that 23, of age.

Nick Urban [00:56:33]:
Mhmm. Okay.

Hannah Went [00:56:36]:
And then, yeah, this is where you can look into the systems, and the related biomarkers and diseases which make up that particular system. So, you know, which biomarkers are used in the training, which diseases are is that individual age predictive of.

Nick Urban [00:56:51]:
So these are mostly blood labs, it looks like.

Hannah Went [00:56:56]:
Yeah. Yes. Like, if you go to musculoskeletons, keep scrolling down, that long list right there. Those are a lot of, like, functional based movements too. So you get a lot of good biomarkers and then more, like, functional based movements as well. So, yeah, this is gonna be, you know, this is very large data out of, some biobank cohorts. That’s why biobanks are so important because we’re only limited by or we are limited by what’s in there. Right? What we can actually go back and look at historically.

Hannah Went [00:57:21]:
So this is why biobanks are super, super important is to create these predictors.

Nick Urban [00:57:25]:
Okay. Gotcha. And then is there another report?

Hannah Went [00:57:28]:
Oh, we have a lot of reports. So we have, like, different versions of summary reports. You know, each report has an individual listed report as well. So just depending on exactly what you, you know, what you wanna focus on, you can, like, dive deep into one of the reports. So if you’re at the beginning of that Symphony age report, you would’ve had a lot of introductory information just on that Symphony age.

Nick Urban [00:57:49]:
Yeah. I saw that, and I I skipped over it just now for the sake of the recording. But you mentioned VO two max and other things you’re able to predict from epigenetics. Is that a different report?

Hannah Went [00:57:59]:
That should be on either the summary report or the physical fitness report in there. What else

Nick Urban [00:58:03]:
do you see? Where do you see diagnostics in general going and for true diagnostics specifically? Yeah. Actually, we’re gonna launch a new product pre launch on November 4th.

Hannah Went [00:58:10]:
It’s called our true health report, which actually is for people who really wanna optimize just their general biomarkers, but with a focus I would say on, like, vitamins, antioxidants, nutritional based markers, mitochondrial health, oxidative stress, hormones, NAD metabolites, some really other cool outcomes as well. So that’s where we use the epigenetic biomarker proxies. Again, just through the lens of epigenetics, we’re able to report out all of these different things, tell you where you’re deficient, and then recommend supplementation and treatment based off of that. So of course, if you’re deficient in that area, in that case, a supplement would be helpful. Right? Because you’re optimizing your overall health for that particular deficiency, which in turn will lower your biological aging as well. We’re also then gonna we’re gonna be creating some some new products, I would say, at the beginning of early next year called methylation risk score products. So methylation risk scores are kind of the epigenetic version of a polygenic risk score. Again, as it relates to genetics where that’s unchangeable, it’s not as helpful, but these methylation risk scores actually predict risk and they’re changeable too.

Hannah Went [00:59:21]:
So we’ll have really unique novel insights for, depression, cardiovascular disease, and a couple others, based off the methylation risk scores too.

Nick Urban [00:59:30]:
Cool. Methylation is a hot topic right now. Why is methylation the focus and acetylation is, like, never brought up in these conversations?

Hannah Went [00:59:39]:
The way you measure it, just you’re you’re able to measure it. Acetylation is really, really hard to measure, but histone acetylation in particular. But I guess you could call it yeah. It’s just nomenclature too, I believe, as well. Just how it was was named.

Nick Urban [00:59:55]:
Hannah, what is your approach when you’re looking at longevity interventions? Well, whether it’s follistatin gene therapy or it’s a new molecule or any of these? How do you separate out, like, what’s gonna potentially work well and what’s just overhyped or potentially risky? Like, how do you think through the long term of these?

Hannah Went [01:00:13]:
I like this question. Gosh. There has to be data around it, you guys. There I mean, you would think that’s, like, really simple. I know these I know biohackers wanna, you know, try stuff on their self, do, like, n of 1 precision based medicine and stuff, but then it’s not really well thought through n of 1 precision based medicine study and they’re not doing the correct testing. Like, there has to be data on it. There has to be even an n of 1 randomized controlled trial published in a peer reviewed journal. That’s a high noteworthy journal as well.

Hannah Went [01:00:44]:
Like, you can do that. Like, there there are there is that data available. There are some companies who who are doing that too. Again, you know, creating kind of these larger bio banks through institutional review boards or IRBs for people to submit kind of more and be kind of one processes and what works and what doesn’t. But again, there just has to be data around it. Like, I I don’t I think there’s a lot of hype around a lot of, again, supplements, molecules, people claiming to reverse, you know, biologically just by up to, you know, 20, 30 years, which I’m telling you, it’s just not possible. You need the the actual data behind it. I think just that that’s just so important.

Hannah Went [01:01:16]:
And if, you know, there’s not data to show, and I probably wouldn’t believe the said thing, person, you know, outcome you’re looking for.

Nick Urban [01:01:25]:
Okay. But, Hannah, if people are listening in and they want the 80 20 of longevity protocols, they want the protocol that only takes 20% of the effort or resources, whatever it is, and it gets them the most possible outcome. Whether it’s molecules or lifestyle things, of course, it’s gonna be doing the basics right, like sleeping enough, moving enough, eating enough, breathing right, getting light exposure, all these types of things. What else would you include in that?

Hannah Went [01:01:49]:
Well, like, my head still goes straight to, like, caloric restriction because, again, like, you’re saving money. You’re, like, doing you know, you’re saving time. You’re skipping a meal or, you know, you’re you’re putting less effort into it. I think a lot of the other things are hard though, like light therapy, you know, you have to stand there, right, in in front of of the light. You have to, like, create create time, which is really hard to do unless you have it in a really cool setup where, you know, you’re doing other things alongside of it. Yeah. I mean, I think food optimization is super important too. Like, if you’re already, like, cooking a meal and things like that, I know that’s so very, very simple.

Hannah Went [01:02:21]:
But right now, you know, there’s a lot of articles out there about how just deplete depleted our food is of of nutrition. So if you’re able to, you know, I think, like, go to the farmer’s market or shop local or do something like that, that’s just gonna have, like, such a big return, not only on your own health, but, like, from an economical standpoint too. That’ll be my answer.

Nick Urban [01:02:44]:
Yeah. That’s a that’s a good one. I’m a big fan of farmer’s markets for so many reasons, and, like, the produce that you get there is actually fresh unlike what you get in the grocery store. Even if you’re going to a high end grocery store from the time it was picked and harvested to arriving on your plate is shockingly long for some fruits and vegetables. Are there any dietary agnostic things that you like to or, I guess, diet agnostic things you like to include in your list of foods, whether it’s a drink, a substance, it’s just something else, like a class, maybe like fiber. Are you a fan of fiber or, like, olive oil, those types of things?

Hannah Went [01:03:18]:
Yeah. Olive oil. Gosh. I love olive oil just because of the way it tastes. Like, I use it every single day. I think it’s so good. So I’m a big fan of olive oil. I think, like, if you wanted to supplement, you know, and just have, like, a good baseline if, like, you’re not doing testing or, you know, like, everyone’s basically deficient in vitamin d.

Hannah Went [01:03:35]:
So you want some vitamin d, you don’t want too much. Not gonna hurt you if you get too much, but you don’t wanna overdo it as well. You probably wanna go to magnesium supplementation, and then you probably want, let’s say, vitamin d, magnesium, and then I would say creatine, probably. Those 3 aren’t going to hurt you. I think I’d also add a methylated b vitamin on top of it, but especially if you’re, you know, again, deficient and you need the testing in order to determine that.

Nick Urban [01:04:05]:
That’s interesting. So you’d choose creatine over something like essential amino acids?

Hannah Went [01:04:09]:
I think so. Yes. I think I would. I think creatine again I think a really big problem is people aren’t going to the gym. They’re not putting in the work. You still need to put in the work for to really optimize, I would say creatine. I mean, essentially, amino acids are super super important. I think they’re great.

Hannah Went [01:04:24]:
I think you should probably do that though as well as, like a good clean protein shake or something to increase protein too. But, yeah, creatine is is great for increasing muscle mass, as well, and and, you know, we lose that as we tend to age.

Nick Urban [01:04:40]:
And you mentioned vitamin d. What about the other fat soluble vitamins that people are often deficient in like a and e and k?

Hannah Went [01:04:47]:
Yeah. I think vitamin d with a and k would be best. You’re picking in part my answers. I love it.

Nick Urban [01:04:54]:
Yeah. And then also on the the mineral side, magnesium, specifically, of course, it’s the most deficient of the the minerals and it’s also an electrolyte. But are you a fan of multiminerals?

Hannah Went [01:05:06]:
I am. Yeah. I think I think it could be helpful. Again, I think there’s, limited research that or, you know, research out there that I’m just not aware of quite yet. So, if anyone have any, I’d be happy to to take a look.

Nick Urban [01:05:19]:
Yeah. I love to see research on how these different substances impact biological age. And then there’s also the question of, are you just fixing a deficiency, or are you getting, like, even more and going to an optimal level? Like, what’s where is it that really coming from? Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. And then the polyphenol supplements, there’s so many of them. They’re all very, very popular in longevity world. Do you like either any of those or just, like, natural sources of polyphenols?

Hannah Went [01:05:48]:
Yeah. I think natural sources of of polyphenols are are great. Again, I think our reporting can tell you if you’re deficient in those antioxidants, especially this new report that’s coming out. But if you have a lower you if you have a shorter telomere length, if you have some EVPs that are out of range on our trade report, I might recommend some type of antioxidant support. Especially if you’re just running really high on stress already. There’s a antioxidant, paradox where you could actually have too much, right, of of the antioxidants and we don’t want that. So always getting them from food, I think. It’s huge.

Hannah Went [01:06:20]:
I really like 5 to 10, quercetin. I think those are the best. You can get 5 to 10 through strawberries consumption. They’re the food that has the most vitamins. So hopefully, like strawberries.

Nick Urban [01:06:30]:
What was that acronym? I’ve heard you say it a couple of times now, EBP?

Hannah Went [01:06:33]:
Epigenetic biomarker proxy. So the other things we’re able to predict through epigenetics, like the clinical lab values or metabolites or proteins.

Nick Urban [01:06:42]:
Well, Hannah, this has been a blast. If people want to connect with you, follow you on your platforms, or try the true diagnostic tests, How do they go about that?

Hannah Went [01:06:52]:
Feel free to follow us. Look us up, trudiagnostic.com. Trudiagnostic in some way, shape, or form on social. I have my everything at the genetics dot com, everything at the genetics on Instagram as well. But, yeah, if anyone has any questions, feel free to email me at hannah@trudyagnostic.com.

Nick Urban [01:07:09]:
Perfect. And you guys set up my listeners with the code urban to save them on their test if they decide to get started too. Couple more questions for you before we sign off today. If there was a worldwide burning of the books and all knowledge is lost, what resources, what teachers would you save, and why?

Hannah Went [01:07:24]:
Yeah. I’m in the mood, obviously focused super highly on epigenetics. Right now, probably doctor Morgan Levine. I would save her because she’s just, like, the best epigenetic researcher out there. I think she’s made, like, super big strides in this space.

Nick Urban [01:07:36]:
What’s one thing the everything epigenetics and the true diagnostic tribes don’t know about you?

Hannah Went [01:07:42]:
I love to read fiction books too. So that’s maybe something that’s different that not a lot of people know.

Nick Urban [01:07:49]:
Okay. Alright, Hannah. If people made it this far, are there any parting words of wisdom you’d like to leave them with?

Hannah Went [01:07:57]:
Oh, if you’re interested in testing, just do it. I think, you know, you could always do a baseline. You have to start somewhere. You’re never too young. You’re never too old to start testing. So, yeah. If you even have an inkling, use next code. I think it’s a a pretty good deal for you all, and, then see where you’re at.

Hannah Went [01:08:12]:
See if you wanna start to make some serious changes in your life, and then you can always decide if you wanna retest later on as well. But if you do, we we have a cool subscription plan as well that saves you a lot of money.

Nick Urban [01:08:20]:
Yeah. Yeah. And this is one of those tests where it’s actually actionable. You can go in, you can make changes, you can retest, and you can hopefully see an improvement as I will find out in shortly when I take my retest.

Hannah Went [01:08:31]:
Yeah. Absolutely. We recommend the retest, you know, every 6 to 12 months. We talked about it a little bit more, the subscription of we’ll ship you 1, every 3 months, I believe. So it’s really good for people who are just wanting to start out and get some real time feedback.

Nick Urban [01:08:44]:
Awesome. Well, Hannah, thank you so much for joining the podcast today.

Hannah Went [01:08:48]:
Awesome. Thanks so much, Nick.

Nick Urban [01:08:49]:
Thank you for tuning in to this episode. Head over to Apple Music, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts and leave a rating. Every review helps me bring you thought provoking guests. As always, you can find the show notes for this one at mindbodypeak.com /, and then the number of the episode. There, you can also chat with other peak performers or connect with me directly. The information depicted in this podcast is for information purposes only. Please consult your primary health care professional before making any lifestyle changes.