Graham Lawton, a columnist at New Scientist, has examined the scientific evidence behind anti-ageing supplements and found that most lack credible support, though a handful show genuine promise for improving biological age markers.
The vast majority of anti-ageing supplements fail rigorous testing. Companies market thousands of products claiming to reverse ageing or extend lifespan, yet peer-reviewed research often contradicts these claims. Lawton, approaching the topic as a skeptic, reviewed studies to separate marketing hype from genuine biology.
Several supplements demonstrate measurable effects on aging biomarkers. Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) precursors like NMN and NR show evidence of improving mitochondrial function and cellular repair mechanisms in human trials. Resveratrol, found in red wine and grape skins, has demonstrated effects on longevity pathways in multiple studies, though human evidence remains limited to surrogate markers rather than extended lifespan. Metformin, the diabetes drug, displays strong epidemiological associations with reduced aging in some populations.
Other candidates include CoQ10, which supports cellular energy production, and certain polyphenols that activate longevity-associated genes. However, Lawton emphasizes that even these promising options lack the large-scale, long-term human trials proving extended lifespan.
The challenge facing anti-ageing supplement research centers on study design. Testing whether a compound actually extends human life requires decades of observation. Instead, researchers measure biological age using epigenetic clocks and metabolic markers, proxies that correlate with longevity but do not guarantee it.
Quality control presents another hurdle. Supplement manufacturing operates under looser regulatory standards than pharmaceuticals, meaning dosages and purity vary significantly between brands. Some products contain far less active ingredient than labels claim.
Lawton's conclusion reflects current scientific