The finder
Pick what you want to change. See who actually measured it.
Every other tool like this gives you a compound and a match score. Those scores are not measured. Ours does not exist. What you get instead is what was actually measured and where: trials in people first with the participant count, then the animal and cell work kept separate, then what people using it report, and the trials that found nothing, counted rather than dropped.
82 of the 444 compounds here have never been through a trial in people. That is worth knowing and it is not a verdict: a molecule nobody can patent has no sponsor to pay for a trial, so a thin human record is usually a fact about money rather than about the compound. Where that is the case, this says so and shows you what does exist.
What are you trying to change?
Pick as many as you like. The number on each one is how many people it has been measured in across the whole archive, so you can see where the evidence is before you choose.
Or start from the compounds
Somebody handed you a stack. What is actually known about it?
Add what you are looking at and you get every outcome those compounds have been measured for in people, and then the longer list of the ones they have not.
Biological age markers
Does it change a biological age clock?
A clock is a prediction, not an outcome. Moving one has never been shown to change what happens to a person, and that limitation belongs on the result.
903 people · 3 human studies · 2 compounds
- 876 people1 study
876 Swedish men aged 35 to 80 followed up to 14 years: serum GDF15 at entry predicted all-cause mortality with an adjusted odds ratio of 3.38 (95 percent CI 1.38 to 8.26), validated in 324 same-sex twins and independent of telomere length, IL-6 and CRP. An association in a cohort, not an intervention.
Aging Cell, 2010 · 876 people
- 27 people2 studies
The result that makes danazol interesting. Phase 1 to 2 prospective study, 27 patients with inherited telomere diseases, danazol 800 mg a day orally for a planned 24 months, primary efficacy endpoint a 20 percent reduction in annual telomere attrition. Halted early because attrition was reduced in all 12 patients...
New England Journal of Medicine, 2016 · 27 people
A Mayo Clinic report describing pancreatitis in the setting of danazol therapy for telomere biology disorders, published eight years after the original trial. An adverse effect identified in ongoing clinical use rather than in the trial.
Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 2024 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
The first replication of the direction of the telomere effect by a group unconnected to the originators: dose-dependent telomere lengthening in normal human epithelial and fibroblast cells through hTERT and telomerase, with alternative lengthening of telomeres seen mainly in cancer lines. A November 2025 correction...
Biogerontology (Brunel University London), 2025 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
Mouse, physiologically ageing wild-type rather than progeroid. Long-term partial reprogramming regimens produced duration-dependent effects in kidney and skin, with reversion of epigenetic clock measures and reduced inflammation, senescence and stress-response gene expression. The authors make no lifespan extension...
Nature Aging, 2022 · no headcount in the line
- no headcount stated0 studies
How this is counted
Human studies only. Animal and test-tube work never enters this ranking, because the question you asked was about a person.
A compound is listed for an outcome only when a citation on its own page states that outcome and reports a result for it. Naming it is not enough: a paper that measures testosterone and reports a result about something else does not count as testosterone evidence, which is a mistake this tool made on its first run and no longer makes.
People counts are read out of the study lines themselves and are deliberate undercounts. Where a line states no number, the study still counts as a study and adds nothing to the headcount. Counts are never added across compounds, because the same person can appear in more than one trial.
Ranking is by people measured. That is a fact about the evidence, not a judgement about the compound, and it is the only ordering this site will defend. A compound at the top of a list is the most studied, which is not the same as the best.
Nothing here is advice, and nothing here is a recommendation to take anything.