Results within the normal range are not the same as optimal results, and that difference has real consequences. Conventional medicine defines reference ranges based on data from the general population, meaning what is typical for the average aging person. A result within these limits tells you that you are not ill. It does not tell you that your body is functioning optimally. Biomarkers in longevity medicine measure precisely this distinction, not the boundary between health and disease, but the space between the two.
This article expands on our Longevity Alphabet series, in which we define the most important concepts in longevity medicine. Discover what our Speaker says about exercise. Watch the video, and follow Elevate on Instagram for more content like this:
Laboratory reference ranges vs. the longevity optimum: two different scales
Reference ranges, meaning the “normal” limits printed next to laboratory results, are determined statistically. Data is collected from a large group of people considered healthy, extreme values on both ends are excluded, and the middle range is defined as normal. The problem is that “healthy” usually means “without a diagnosed disease,” not “in optimized health.” In a population where most adults lead sedentary lifestyles and are overweight, the normal range for many parameters does not describe a state worth aiming for.
For example, fasting glucose below 100 mg/dL is considered normal. Research shows, however, that levels between 90 and 100 mg/dL in apparently healthy individuals are associated with a clearly higher risk of developing diabetes over the following decade than levels below 85 mg/dL. A person with a result of 98 mg/dL is told that it is “within the normal range,” even though their glucose metabolism is already signaling something worth paying attention to.
Longevity medicine uses narrower, more demanding ranges for key parameters. These are based not on the average population, but on data showing which levels correlate with a long and healthy life. There is no single official list of such ranges, and different longevity centers provide slightly different values. The principle, however, remains the same: the optimum is usually more demanding than the norm.
Why is one result not enough?
Biological aging does not have a single indicator. It is a process occurring simultaneously at the metabolic, inflammatory, hormonal, and functional levels. Only by combining several complementary parameters can we obtain a sufficiently precise picture to draw meaningful conclusions.
Consider CRP, C reactive protein, one of the markers of inflammation in the body. An elevated level may indicate an infection, chronic stress, a poor diet, sleep deprivation, or an intense workout the previous day. On its own, it is ambiguous. It becomes useful only when considered alongside other inflammatory markers, glucose and insulin profiles, and hormonal results, all within the context of a specific person’s lifestyle.
This is why longevity testing is planned in panels: sets of complementary indicators rather than individual tests. We described in greater detail how different types of biomarkers, including epigenetic clocks, can be used to assess the biological age of the body in the article Do You Know How Old You Really Are? What You Should Know About Biological Age.
The basic panel: where to begin
For anyone who wants to take a more informed approach to health, there is a set of tests that are widely available, affordable, and provide a solid baseline. The key categories are outlined below.
Glucose and insulin metabolism
Fasting glucose is the starting point, but in longevity medicine it is supplemented with two important parameters. Glycated hemoglobin, or HbA1c, shows the average blood glucose level over the previous 2 to 3 months rather than only on a single morning. Fasting insulin reveals disturbances in glucose metabolism before glucose moves outside the normal range. When cells respond poorly to insulin, a condition known as insulin resistance, the pancreas produces increasing amounts of it to maintain normal blood glucose. This excess insulin is the first warning sign. It is assessed using the HOMA IR index, calculated from both results.
Advanced lipid panel
A standard lipid panel measures total cholesterol, HDL, often called “good cholesterol,” which transports lipids to the liver, LDL, which can accumulate in the walls of blood vessels, and triglycerides, which are fats circulating in the blood. In the longevity approach, particular attention is given to triglycerides, ideally below 80 mg/dL, and to their ratio to HDL, which strongly correlates with insulin resistance. Another valuable addition is Lp(a), or lipoprotein(a), a particle whose elevated level significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. It is largely determined by genetics and does not decline in response to diet or standard medications. It is worth testing at least once in your lifetime.
Inflammatory markers
Chronic low grade inflammation, which can persist unnoticed in tissues for years while gradually causing damage, is one of the main mechanisms accelerating biological aging. The standard marker is hsCRP, or high sensitivity CRP. This version of the test is precise enough to detect low levels of inflammation that a regular CRP test may miss. It can be supplemented with homocysteine, an amino acid whose elevated blood level is associated with the risk of heart disease and memory decline, and ferritin, an iron storage protein that can indicate persistent inflammation when present at high concentrations.
Hormones
The levels of key hormones change measurably with age and directly affect energy, body composition, mood, and the ability to recover. The hormones most commonly tested in the context of longevity include testosterone, which is important in both women and men, although within different ranges, DHEA S, or dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, a hormone produced by the adrenal glands whose level naturally declines with age and is treated as one marker of the rate of biological aging, thyroid hormones such as TSH, fT3, and fT4, and, in women, estradiol and progesterone.
Vitamin D
Although it is called a vitamin, it acts like a hormone in the body. It regulates the activity of hundreds of genes and affects immunity, metabolism, and bone health. Deficiency is common in Poland, particularly from fall through spring. Testing blood levels of 25(OH)D3 before beginning supplementation makes it possible to match the dose to actual needs. Without testing, supplementation is essentially guesswork. The optimal longevity range is usually considered to be 50 to 80 ng/mL, significantly higher than the lower boundary of the laboratory reference range.
More advanced biomarkers: when is it worth going further?
For people who already have the basics under control and want deeper insight into the pace of their aging, more specialized measurements are available.
Epigenetic clocks are tests that estimate the biological age of cells based on DNA methylation patterns, chemical markers on genetic material that change predictably with age. A 45 year old person may have an epigenetic cellular age of 38 or 53, depending on how they have lived. This is one of the few biomarkers that measures the pace of aging directly rather than indirectly through risk markers.
VO2max, the maximum amount of oxygen the body can transport and use during intense exercise, is a measure of cardiorespiratory fitness and one of the strongest predictors of lifespan in population studies. People with a high VO2max live longer and are less likely to develop cardiovascular, metabolic, and neurodegenerative diseases. Importantly, VO2max can be improved effectively through training at any age. We discuss this in greater detail in the article VO₂max: What Does Your Aerobic Capacity Reveal About Your Health and Longevity?
Plasma proteomics, the analysis of proteins circulating in the blood, is a newer field that makes it possible to assess the biological age of individual organs. The heart, brain, liver, and kidneys may age at different rates within the same person, and these differences can be measured in the blood. Most such tests are not yet routinely available in Poland, but this area of research is developing rapidly and is worth following.
Conclusions
Biomarkers are tools, and they are useful only when you know what to do with them. A single result without context tells you very little. Their value appears when testing is performed regularly, because trends over time matter more than a one time measurement, results are considered together, and conclusions are translated into specific actions such as changing habits, beginning supplementation, or consulting a specialist.
A metabolic and inflammatory panel interpreted through the lens of the optimum rather than only the normal range is a good starting point. This is a question worth discussing with a physician familiar with longevity medicine. For those who are only beginning, it is enough to start recording each new result and observing the direction of change. That observation alone is already valuable information.
Bibliography
1. Matthews DR et al. Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and beta-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00280883
2. Kronenberg F et al. Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis: a European Atherosclerosis Society consensus statement: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/43/39/3925/6670882
3. Ridker PM et al. C-reactive protein and other markers of inflammation in the prediction of cardiovascular disease in women: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200003233421202
4. Kokkinos P et al. Exercise capacity and mortality in older men: a 20-year follow-up study. Circulation: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.938852
5. Holick MF. Vitamin D deficiency: https://www.nejm.org/doi/abs/10.1056/NEJMra070553
6. Horvath S, Raj K. DNA methylation-based biomarkers and the epigenetic clock theory of ageing: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-018-0004-3
7. Nichols GA et al. Normal fasting plasma glucose and risk of type 2 diabetes diagnosis: https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(08)00231-3/abstract
8. Ferrucci L et al. Measuring biological aging in humans: a quest: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/acel.13080
