Your chronological age and your physical age are two different things according to researchers, and it’s possible for two people of the same age to display a dramatically different rate of aging.  But should this really come as a big surprise?  If you are aware of the full range of benefits of a good exercise or diet program – greater strength and energy, weight loss, clearer thinking, improved blood lipid profile, etc., they pretty much mirror the losses attributed to aging.  We have the ability to instigate and witness these differences in ourselves, so why the surprise?

Researchers at Duke university studied aging in 954 young adults, reviewing their “progress” at two intervals ; age 26 and age 38.  Using a broad spectrum of parameters such as hip/waist ratio, blood pressure, cognitive ability, organ function, and even telemetric length, they were able to assess a “biological age” differential among the subjects of up to 33 years. (Some 38 years olds had a physical age of 28 while their peers indicated age 61)  Their findings were published in the Proceedings of the Nat. Academy of Sciences.

I have advocated many simple protocols to address virtually the whole list of age factors they examined.  If you begin a simple exercise program (ideas), limit processed foods, and start a simple inexpensive supplement program, you not only will look and feel better for it, but you will actually age far slower than you would otherwise.  So does chronological aging really matter?

Age wonderfully, not gracefully.

Warren