Longevity Protocol Comparison: Top Experts, Side by Side

The strongest-evidence items are exactly the ones he pushes hardest; every D-grade molecule (rapamycin, lithium, Ca-AKG, resveratrol) is flagged as a personal experiment, not a recommendation.

Minimalist by design — only the statin (CVD) and creatine reach A-grade, and he drops hyped molecules once the trials disappoint.

The muscle-centric core (adequate protein + resistance training + creatine) is legitimately A/B; the supplement periphery is optional, not load-bearing.

Evidence-literate core — creatine, vitamin D, magnesium and ashwagandha reach B for narrow endpoints; rapamycin and AG1 are the weak links.

A solid evidence-based core (vitamin D, creatine, L-theanine, ashwagandha) wrapped in thinly-evidenced performance add-ons like apigenin and fadogia agrestis.

A rational, biomarker-driven stack — roughly 6 items reach B — but no component has direct human longevity-outcome evidence.

The A-grade items are the conventional ones (statin, berberine); the signature molecules — NMN, resveratrol, spermidine — sit at C, and the aspirin evidence actually argues against use in healthy people.

Exhaustively measured but evidence-thin — 0 A, 5 B (olive oil, cocoa, vitamin D, magnesium, ashwagandha), and not one item with human lifespan data.

Modal grade C; only creatine, magnesium, vitamin D3 and berberine (metabolic-only) reach solid RCT support.

The best-supported items (magnesium, vitamin D, ashwagandha) act on surrogates like blood pressure and stress; the signature longevity ingredients are C-D on small studies.

Only the staples — magnesium, vitamin D, omega-3, creatine — carry support; the signature items (methylene blue, hydrogen water, NMN, grounding, extra salt) do not.

The one supplement that earns its hype — A-tier for muscle, strength and safety, B for cognition. The common denominator of every good stack.

Reliably raises the NAD+ biomarker across multiple RCTs, but every clinical outcome is short, small and mixed — no hard-outcome or lifespan data in humans.

An exceptionally reproducible animal lifespan signal, but the two human RCT programs (immune function, PEARL) missed their endpoints. Not proven in people.

Grade A for diabetes, grade D for lifespan in healthy non-diabetics — no completed RCT, a confounded observational signal, and possible blunting of exercise adaptation. TAME still pending.

Best-in-class human RCT evidence (CALERIE): improves cardiometabolic risk, inflammation and thymic function and slows a pace-of-aging biomarker; human lifespan benefit still unproven.

Real human RCTs — effective for weight and metabolic health, roughly equal to calorie restriction; lifespan benefit unproven.

Strong preclinical data plus two small open-label human pilots showing senescent-cell clearance, but no randomized trials and no clinical outcomes yet.