Risks and limits of Longevity Basis

The concept of a 'Longevity Basis' (e.g., as a DNA test or biomarker panel) promises personalized anti-aging strategies but carries significant risks and limitations. Available evidence shows that many genetic markers used (e.g., ACTN3, HLA-DQB1, polygenic risk scores) have only weak or moderate associations with longevity or age-related diseases. Effect sizes are generally small, and predictive power for individuals is limited. Furthermore, many studies suffer from ancestry bias and lack clinical validation. For senescence biomarkers like p16INK4a or IL-6, these are mechanistic surrogates whose direct translation into therapeutic actions is not yet established. Senolytics and senomorphics are in early clinical phases – no drug is approved for anti-aging therapy. Another risk is misinterpretation: a 'high risk' result for celiac disease or diabetes may lead to unnecessary diet changes or anxiety without physician involvement. Pharmacogenetic tests lacking core genes (e.g., CYP2D6) are misleading. In summary, longevity tests can serve as a prompt for healthy habits but do not replace medical advice. The evidence is predominantly mechanistic and insufficient for clinical decisions.