Just a reminder that this will be a small pilot study (hopefully up to 40 paricipants), so it might be difficult to find statisical significance in the results
Mt feeling is that making it any more complicated by having participants list specific supplements they take the different diets they engage in, would be too difficult an exercise and have very little chance of finding anything of significance, since there is no known substance or intervention that reduces the rate of aging by more than a small percentage (in humans)
Even just having people rank the 4 items previously mentioned is unlikely to reveal anything significant since genetics play a crucial role and the ranking is subjective.
Another possible question that could be asked of participants is how long it has been since they made a conscious decision to engaging in anti-aging activities. If any of the interventions "work" then perhaps there will be "better" results from those who have been at it longer.
What do you think? Any different suggestions? If anyone is familiar with epidemiological-type studies such as this please share your knowledge. I don't want to bog things down with something complicated. Based on past experience, people are more likely to follow through and complete an activity when it is easy.
Maybe we skip the questionnaire in the beginning, and then have people fill in lifestyle factors or their anti-aging strategies later.
Also remember that even if the testing does not reveal any difference from the general population, we still learn something - that all of our current efforts are a waste of time and money are not doing much (changing DNAm in a measurable way). And, we instill a very important culture of objective testing, which will be crucial gong forward as more anti-aging therapies arrive on the scene.
Edited by Mind, 16 April 2018 - 08:36 PM.