How to be a "Super Ager" (it's not your genes)

This is the Ted Radio Hour. Each week, groundbreaking Ted Talks. Our job now is to dream big. Deliver it at Ted Conferences. To bring about the future we want to seek. Around the world. To understand who we are. From those talks, we bring you speakers and ideas that will surprise you. You just don't know what you're gonna find. Challenge you. We truly have to ask ourselves, like, why is it noteworthy? And even change you. I literally feel like I'm a different person. Yes. Do you feel that way? Ideas worth spreading. From Ted. And NPR. I'm Manouche Zamorodi. On the show today, a guide to being a super-ager. Living long and well. It's a strange moment for growing old. We live in an era when some seem to be suggesting that aging. I'm that crazy guy trying to not die. Is optional. I think we're entering into a new era where death may no longer be inevitable. Silicon Valley elite, celebrities and influencers alike race against the clock to limit signs of aging. We are essentially hacking human biology. I've had three facelifts. Everywhere the light touches is Botoxed. People collect more data about their bodies than ever. Having a Fitbit has truly changed my life. And AI is bringing breakthroughs for conditions once thought to be untreatable. AI will help cure diseases. Yes. AI will help cure cancer. Yes. And ready in the process of treatment. But we're also in an age of insurance, inequity and uneven distribution of these medical miracles. Not to mention billion-dollar industries built on selling you alleged cures to growing and looking older. So it's hard to know. What hot trend or medical breakthrough is worth spending your time and money on. And what is, well, bunk? It drives me nuts. It's things that we have validation. With all kinds of great studies and the highest level peer review literature to take years before it gets to implementation. This is Dr. Eric Topel. I am a cardiologist, an author of Super Agers and I'm a professor and executive vice president at scripture research. Eric is an expert on the best ways to expand not just our lifespan or how long we actually live, but our health span. A lot of this longevity fixation is related to lifespan rather than health span, healthy aging. Uh-huh. The average American health span is 64. That's when major diseases creep in and lifespan is 79 on average. So you got a big gap of about 15 years. Oh wow. Where your health span is ended and your lifespan continues. In some ways, Eric's career has been driven by his own personal obsession. With the idea that through science and medicine, we can change our aging destiny. I grew up with so many of my family members dying at very young ages. My grandparents and aunts and uncles. I spent a lot of time as a kid going to funerals and my parents also died at a young age. So I feel like, well, I'm condemned. I'm going to be signing out at any time here. So part of it was just understanding our fate, if you will. Part of it is also to shed some light on a field that's had lots of confusion. And this equivalence of health span with lifespan, which is so different that, you know, we need to really compartmentalize these and understand that what drives them are altogether different. Long before he made a breakthrough discovery in the science of healthy aging, we'll get to that in a minute. He was a curious college student, sure that people's genes held the answer to how long they would live. I always was fascinated by genetics and I basically set up a major in genetics and wrote a thesis in 1975 called prospects for gene therapy and man long before we could sequence genes, of course. That was about 40 years early, I think. But it was more like understanding what makes us tick and I was working as a respiratory technician, night shift. And I saw, while I was in the intensive care unit, changing the equipment, it was like a Lazarus. These patients, I was thinking the next day I wouldn't be there and then all of a sudden they would come back to life on their way to full recovery. That prompted me to change my plan of going on to be someday a genetics professor of sorts to hope. Maybe I should just be a doctor and change into medicine. So it's interesting then that some of your most recent research is actually saying, "Jeans, we thought you were super important when it comes to aging, actually not so much." Yeah, that was a real shocker. So many years ago we started a unique project of finding people who were at least 80 years old, who'd never been sick and on no medications. This is a rarefied group, but the whole idea was, there'd been so little work on the genetics of health span. There'd been a fair amount to look at some genetics of people who were sent in air-ans with extreme lifespan, but that's different from people who never had an age-related disease. Eric and his team called this group of super-aging healthy anomalies over the age of 80, the welderly. It took seven years to find 1400 participants, and then once we had them all together, we did whole genome sequencing to look for what was the genomic underpinnings to see if they were different than the people who are recall the elderly. That's elderly. The people, most of us, who typically have at least one major age-related illness by age 65. Eric and the Scripps Research Team looked for the longevity secrets in the DNA of welderly super-agers, and what they found changed everything they thought they knew about how humans age. The stunning result was, well, there were some small differences. Otherwise, there was not much to be able to say this was a genetic story at all. This was either due to luck, which seemed far-fetched to say all these people were so lucky, or something else. I think that something else is what we've learned so much about in the last couple of years, especially, that the immune system of people, when it's intact, really helps to withstand these major age-related diseases. Although that has some connect with our genetics and our DNA, it's also highly influenced by our lifestyle, choices, and our environment, and so many other factors. We want those last few decades of our lives not to be in firm or lonely or in pain. We want to feel vibrant and part of the world and enjoy ourselves. You have said that the real opportunity now isn't just helping people live longer, but preventing those big diseases that make aging hard, really awful. The big three you say are Alzheimer's, heart disease, and cancer. The big three age-related diseases are the most important ones. Eric says there are five domains that help predict risk and prevent age-related diseases. The first, he calls, Lifestyle Plus. The Lifestyle one, we've learned a lot more about sleep regularity, being so important, and deep sleep when our brain washes out all of its metabolites that are really pro-inflammatory, toxic to our brain. That's why deep sleep is so important. Exercise is not just aerobic, but also strength, resistance training, and balance training. We've learned also how social engagement is so critical, being out in nature, and many, many different lifestyle factors which we didn't realize how important they are. The next area to focus on in prevention is what Eric calls omics. Now, omics refers to the biological layers. We're talking about genes, DNA, or so-called polygenic risk score, because these diseases we've been talking about are not from one gene, but from hundreds of different genes that can interact. But also our proteins. There's big breakthroughs and proteins. Now we have these organ clocks, where we can tell the pace of each organ in our body, from our brain, our immune system, our artery, heart, liver, and on and on. And then there's these biomarkers. We have this big, big breakthrough for Alzheimer's to be able to predict even 20 or more years in advance, so-called PETO-217. So omics are proteins in genes, and the microbiome of our gut, and the side chains of our DNA called methylation. Those are omics. Then there's our cellular health. big area because we're going to be using cell therapy for lots of things like autoimmune disease. We've seen cured potentially for people with refractory lupus and multiple sclerosis and many autoimmune diseases which was unfathomable until recent times using cell therapy not just take cells out of the body but working with lymphocytes that are in the body. Next to be a super ageer, Eric says we need vaccines and drugs to help treat aging's biggest culprit. Inflammation. Vaccine and drugs that basically keep our immune system healthy and are potent anti-inflammatories. We've seen a remarkable class of drugs, the ozemic GLP-1 drug that have that property. Finally to tie all that bio data together, you guessed it, artificial intelligence. We couldn't pull all these data together in any individual without multimodal AI. It's billions and billions of data points for each person. We couldn't think of being able to prevent these diseases without the help of the tools of AI for the analytics. So those of the five domains, they're all going to be part of our ability to predict a person's risk and prevent their age-related disease in the future. So can you explain how inflammation relates to that? Because I think a lot of us have been hearing that word, Women's magazines for years, eat a low inflammatory diet, blueberries and almonds and we think, okay, yes, I will do that. But what exactly is inflammation? Yeah, so when our immune system, which is all of our cells and proteins that fight off not just infections, but keep us from getting cancer and heart disease and neurodegenerative diseases, our immune system starts to lose its integrity as we get older and it's the process of immunosinescence. And then interdependent with that is inflammation with aging. So inflammation with aging. And so when the immune system is dysregulated when it's just getting off the rails, it starts to go haywire and makes a lot of these proteins that are basically untoward inflammation, whether it's in the brain or throughout the body and the walls of arteries. And this is what causes so much trouble. So some inflammation is good and important for healing, but inflammation is really accelerating and making these age-related diseases take home. When we come back, Dr. Eric Topel explains why AI has changed the way he thinks about preventive care and how our modern medical advances could give us all a shot at being super-agers. You're listening to the Ted Radio Hour from NPR, I'm Manouche Zomerody. We'll be right back. It's the Ted Radio Hour from NPR. I'm Manouche Zomerody. Today on the show, how to become a super agent. When Dr. Eric Topel studied the DNA of healthy people over 80 years old, so-called super-agers, he expected to see something in their genes that was protecting them from major age-related diseases. Instead, he found that genes had a pretty minimal effect. It was lifestyle choices and preventive measures that extended their health span. Because, of course, a long life is great, but not if you're miserable and suffering. We can accept that we're going to age, okay? So maybe they'll be reversal of aging someday, but that's a little more far-fetched. But we don't have to accept that we are going to have these age-related big three diseases, heart disease and cancer or neurodegenerative diseases. And so that's where the opportunity lies. There's so much going on right now that with 20 years advance warning of these conditions in individuals determining that risk, predicting it, we should be able to get ahead of it and make a big dent in these big three age-related diseases. So does that mean that essentially, as you age, keeping your immune system in good shape is the whole game? That's a real big part of it. What we eat is a part of that story, how we exercise, how we sleep, how we have social engagement, a long list of lifestyle plus factors. But also, we've only learned in recent times that there are other ways to keep that immune system intact. And one of the big surprises was, for example, the shingles vaccine. We didn't know. And now with four huge natural experiments in four different countries around the world in Wales, in Canada, Australia and the US, we've learned that the shingles vaccine reduces Alzheimer's and dementia by at least 20 to 25%. Oh wow. And it isn't because it's working against the virus. Herpes are so much as it's keeping the immune system intact because people that get the vaccine are older people. In the US, it's age 50 in other countries. It's even older. But that's just one new trick we've learned. And now, you know, that's the segue to many other tactics we'll use in the future to keep people's immune system intact. So I recently got my first shingles shot. And it certainly was not touted to me as preventive medicine for anything other than getting shingles, which I'm told is very painful and just awful. Why is this not more public knowledge that there is more information out there about the added benefits of vaccines and other preventive medicines? This is so starling. If this was a drug to reduce Alzheimer's disease, it would be a blockbuster. Everyone would know about it because the farmer companies would be all over it. But because it's a vaccine and we live in an anti-vax moment, this wasn't expected. This was a surprise. It's not just been replicated, but now four different, what we call natural experiments, which are better than even randomized trials in many respects. So I don't think the word is out there. I've been trying to help get it out, but there hasn't been enough work to disseminate these very important findings. And it isn't just going to be this vaccine. We're going to have lots of other ways to improve the immune system. So, for example, very recently we learned about the importance of the thymus gland. And the thymus gland, which is- I don't even remember what that is. Medical world has forgotten. As well. Yeah, because your thymus gland is pretty big and functional when you're a child, but as you become a teenager and to adulthood, it was thought that it becomes just fatty tissue and a functional. Where is it and what does it do? Well, it's under the sternum and the chest bone. But we've learned- I mean, this is amazing. So researchers at Harvard, Hugo Ertson, his colleagues, they used AI to define the thymus, quantify its health in adults, average age in their late 50s, in 25,000 plus people who were followed many, many years from a chest CT scan. They could quantify the thymus health and the people who had good thymus health, that it wasn't just fatty tissue and wasn't a functional. They had incredibly improved survival, lack of cancer, they had lack of cardiovascular disease, they had all the benefits that we saw of super-agers, right? So this is another remarkable discovery that reinforces how our immune system, which of course connects with inflammation, how that is so fundamental to healthy aging. This to me is a landmark series of reports. It also showed through a separate paper that if you're going to get cancer treatment, if you have a healthy thymus as an adult, your chance of recovery or lack of remission is much, much higher. And here again, we thought the thymus gland was doing nothing in adults and it's doing a lot in some people. So now I'm thinking, of course, tell me how to protect my thymus, something that did not occur to me to ask until this very moment. Great question. There's lots of things being considered about how we could keep our thymus healthy. But the things we talked about that work on our immune system in general, exercise a diet that's anti-inflammatory, good sleep health, these things probably do help keep our thymus in a healthy state. But we need to do more than that. So there are various new studies in recent times that certain growth factors, one's called FGF21, and there's this incredible Mexican salamander that has the ability to keep their thymus and regenerated even after you surgically remove it. We're learning about the pathways from that organism. But we don't know enough about thymus health now that there's been this really remarkable discovery about its importance as we get older. Well, I'm going to take this opportunity, Dr. Topel, to ask you about technology and mammograms. So every woman is told they should start getting mammograms. I believe it's after the age of 40. And recently I went and they said, do you want to spend an extra $40 to get an AI screen? And I was like, okay, sure. I don't really know what that is. They said it will find things more carefully. Here's the $40. Did I make the right decision? Well, I'd say yes and no. Firstly, I don't believe they should charge patients to get the AI read. But that read does give a higher detection rate about 30% more breast cancers are picked up from the AI as compared to the radiologists. So that parts good information. But what really unnerves me is there are other two types of AI tools that should be incorporated as well. Again, without charging patients. And that is the AI of the normal mammogram to detect the risk in the next three to five years. And then also the AI of the breast artery calcification. 'Cause that quantifies the risk of heart disease in that person. So we are not using AI as we should. We shouldn't be charging patients. And we're only using the first of the three different types of AI to get the superhuman interpretation of the mammogram. Hmm. I mean, my experience just makes me think, wow, AI is arriving in healthcare as an upsell before most of us even understand what it's capable of, what it does. So set the scene for us. What is the current moment that we are in when it comes to technology and healthcare? And where are we going? Right. Well, the medical imaging is the most advanced part of medical AI because it's been incubating and progressing for several years now. And so now for most medical images, whether it's an X-ray, a mammogram, cat scan, pet scans, whatever type of scan, and also things like the retina, the cardiogram, pathology slides, we now have very strong evidence that AI can interpret the image better than expert physicians, which is a big step forward for AI. So it enhances the accuracy. It doesn't mean that it shouldn't be reviewed by physicians, but it sees things that we can't see, superhuman eyes, if you will. And so the problem is, I mean, we haven't leveraged that at all. And the only thing that, you know, barely we're getting at it, things like just a piece of the mammogram and not having it appropriately embedded as part of the procedure rather than putting a burden on patients for cost. And we're not doing it for most of the things that we know it has remarkable capabilities for accuracy. So this is the area that has come along the most, but of course it's been worked on for several years. - Dr. Eric Topel explains AI's potential from the TED state. - The thing that we don't talk much about, are diagnostic medical errors. And according to the National Academy of Medicine, almost all of us will experience at least one in our lifetime. We know from a recent Johns Hopkins study that these errors have led to 800,000 Americans dead or seriously disabled each year. So this is a big problem. The question is, can AI help us? This is a picture of the retina. This was the first major hint, training 100,000 images with supervised learning, could the machine see things that people couldn't see? And so the question was, to the retinal experts, is this from a man or a woman? And the chance of getting an accurate was 50%. But the AI got it right, 97%. These ability for computer vision to pick up things that human eyes can't see is quite remarkable. Here's the retina. Picking up the control of diabetes and blood pressure. Kidney disease, liver and gall bladder disease. The heart calcium score, which you would normally get through a scan of the heart. Alzheimer's disease before any clinical symptoms have been manifest. Predicting heart attacks and strokes. Hyper-lippidemia. Seven years before any symptoms of Parkinson's disease to pick that up. In the future, we'll be taking pictures of our retina as checkups. This is the gateway to almost every system in the body. Now, as a cardiologist, I love to read cardiograms. I've been doing it for over 30 years. But I couldn't see these things. In your talk that you gave, this was in 2023, you explained the potential of retinal scans. This is a photograph of the back of your eye that apparently tells AI, not just about your eye health, but your risk of all kinds of things. Is that happening now? How is a picture of your eye showing us whether we might be at risk for kidney disease or Parkinson's or a heart attack even? Yeah, so what's a great question? Because again, we should be doing this. The retina is probably the richest image there is from our body because it's a gateway to virtually, not just the brain, but to every part of our body. It's surprisingly things like the kidney, the liver, even things we never would have forecasted. But especially telling us about risk for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's and many other conditions, heart disease, risk of stroke. So it turns out that's one area, not in the United States, but in Hong Kong and in Asia, where they have started companies to provide that data from a retinal picture. So it isn't available here. Again, we're behind, but we're seeing now the output. So there's companies that are giving you your retina picture that you get from your eye doctor and telling you your risk of heart disease based on that. And also one that's giving risk of Alzheimer's disease. So it isn't here yet, but eventually, it should be the norm. This is what we call opportunistic imaging, where there's so much in that image that we're leaving on the table. And AI can give us so much more, and it's just software. It's not any extra cost. So eventually we'll get there. A kid that eventually will take selfies of our own retina and have an AI algorithm give us an output of like every part of our body, every condition that we might be at risk for if you want to get that information. But we're not there yet, because right now we still rely on the kind of high quality retina images that you get from an eye doctor. Do you have hope that there can be this transition from playing whack-a-mole with disease in terms of how we treat people and becoming more of a preventative, a more sort of resilient older population? Yes, this is where I have the most excitement for the future of medicine, and in particular, the use of AI. I think in the years ahead, we will regard AI's most important contribution as facilitating prevention. Prevention, especially of these three age-related diseases that we've been talking about, because they are 80, 85% of the difference between health span and lifespan. So we are at a time, when 20 years ahead or more, we can tell a person, you know, say they're age 50, not only are they at high risk for one of these diseases, but we can also tell them for the first time, when, not just if. Then we can do all these things so that we changed what would be their natural history. And I am confident, eventually, we're going to have ways to prevent these big three age-related diseases. And that's why, you know, we're starting very soon, the first prevention of Alzheimer's trial, in 1,200 people with very high risk of Alzheimer's, because of their apoe4 genetics, their protein markers, PTAC 217, their family history, their polygenic risk. And we're going to test, for the first time in this large scale study, the lifestyle factors, the exercise, the sleep, the diet, and the stress, in a coached group, intensive coaching, versus a group that just gets some educational material. And then after that, we'll start looking at different drug candidates on top of lifestyle, assuming that we show and validate that that makes a difference in these markers, like the brain, age and clock, and the P-Tow to 17, which are really reliable ways to project the arc of a person's Alzheimer's risk. So we're in a new day. - What will the coached people get? I'm curious. - Oh, yeah. So they get 24/7, virtual and human coaching. Basically, for all lifestyle factors, they're going to get continuous aggressive coaching with human backup for questions, and encouragement and able to dissect how much of the benefit, assuming there is, is related to exercise. How much of it's due to sleep and on and on. You should all be quantified for each individual. - And for each individual. - So I might be a person who doesn't need quite as much sleep, but I definitely need to move regularly because of my genetic profile and because of my habits or something like that. - Right, and one thing that's really important that I think you've touched on, when we tell the whole world, this is what you should be doing. It doesn't really get a lot of uptake and respect, but when we talk to an individual and we define precisely what their risk is and when it might show up, the chance of them making some changes in their lifestyle, which we know has impact, it's much, much greater. Everything has to work at the individual level, the population level messages just don't have that kind of impact. - In a minute, Dr. Eric Topel on how America's healthcare system can make it tough to age well. And the health trends he thinks are total nonsense. - You've got the same people who wouldn't take a vaccine, which has randomized trials, tens of thousands of people with overwhelming benefit to risk ratio. And there's the same people that would inject an experimental peptide in their blood. - I'm Manuch Zomerodi, and you're listening to the Ted Radio Hour from NPR. Protein macsars and peptide curious, stay with us. (electronic music) Before we get back to the show, have you checked out the NPR app recently? From live radio and digital stories to videos and podcasts, the NPR app has everything you love about NPR in one place. It's the Ted Radio Hour from NPR, I'm Manuch Zomerodi. On the show today, we're talking to Dr. Eric Topel about what it takes to be a super-ager in an era of make America healthy again, health fluincers, and billion dollar anti-aging industries. So I take around 30 pills for breakfast and around 20 pills for lunch. - First I started doing the cold plunge. That's crazy, but now my body feels so good. - Yeah, so my son gave me a liter of plasma, I gave my dad a liter of plasma. - We are in this sort of strange cultural moment where longevity has become sort of a status symbol, right? Like, can you spend money on supplements and do cold plunges and people are biohacking and getting the plasma infusions of young relatives. People have clearly gotten the message of prevention, but where is the line between real longevity science and the pseudoscience? Because I think for some people, it all sounds highly scientific or maybe there's not quite the proof, but what does it hurt? - Right, well, we have a moment where the medical communities word and judgment is being challenged every day and the idea that there's these influencers who they have the secrets, they know, right? They have the big impact. So like, example of cold plunge, right? This is remarkable. I mean, I'm a cardiologist and I would consider cold plunge a stress test much more than a treadmill because you get in a cold plunge, you are getting a big jump in blood pressure, you're constricting all your blood vessels, your heart rate is jacked up. And if you're gonna have a heart attack, you could find out in the midst of a cold plunge or sooner or after. I would never suggest people who might have risk for heart disease to have that. And there's no dearle data to show benefit. - But it makes you feel alive, Eric. - Yeah, yeah. It's gonna give you more brown fat. I mean, help me. I mean, this is just too much. So every one of these things, the peptide craze, the protein craze, all these things are unsubstantiated and potentially dangerous. - That's the question I have. Peptides and protein. - If you're aging faster than you want, you want the glow stack. So it's a stack of peptides, which enhance cellular data. - My Instagram feed is gonna be filled with them that I just said those two words out loud. - Protein popcorn, protein cookies, protein pop tarts, like candy. - What is the deal? Well, protein builds muscle, I suppose, but peptides has become, I don't even know what they truly are. Can you talk us through both of those? - Yeah, so the protein thing just to take that quickly, there are advocates like Peter Atia to take much higher than recommended protein, daily consumption. For example, one gram per pound, which is about three times what the recommended allowance is. And you could make a case that maybe you should increase from what the recommended allowance is, but that level of protein, people don't know that we can't store any protein in our body. So it just goes right out. Second, if you're taking all this extra protein, it doesn't come without other calories. You know, we have obesity and overweight epidemic and why would you want to take unnecessary extra calories? Next, there's the cost of all these protein powders and bars and all that. And then finally, the thing that most people aren't aware, that extra protein, especially if it's coming from animal sources, that is a problem. Red meat, for example, that is pro-inflammatory. We don't want that. So this is dangerous and also unsubstantiated. There are no data to support this protein craze. - Is this just the latest version of the keto diet? - Yeah, I mean, the keto diets, that has some utility in certain rare examples like to manage epilepsy, potentially certain cancer treatments, but overall the keto diet faded because it has risks that were not adequately taken into account. Protein, I think, is going to slide down eventually when people get it. - I can't keep it in the meal. My peptides. - Now peptides. - 157. It just makes you feel freaking good. Like you wake up, no pain, no pain. - This thing teaches your body to just burn more calories. Theoretically, you could change nothing about your diet or your exercise and still lose weight. - You know, this is really interesting, because I reviewed all the data, which there basically aren't no data for the peptides. - Interesting. - This is just, you know, a couple of amino acids strung together and there are many of them that are in wide scale use, like BPC 157. You know, I made up one called BS202. (laughing) That's literally what they are, right? They have no data. They mostly come from China. You don't even know what you're getting when they've sent them to independent labs. Sometimes they're not even the peptide that they say. They are sometimes basically, there's nothing there. Or sometimes they're contaminated. They aren't necessarily sterile. People are injecting these into their bloodstream. So these have no track record, except in some animal studies. There are no good human studies that show placebo controls. These are very expensive. Usually 250 to 300 dollars. Often they're taken in stacks, multiple. - Yeah, what's your stack Eric? Isn't that what people say? - Yeah, what's your stack? It's incredible. This is just completely out of control. We even have the HHS Secretary, RFK Jr., who is a big advocate of these peptides and is trying to take them off from being banned from compounding facilities throughout the country. - So the supplements are not regulated. I have the peptides are not supposed to be regulated by an administration improperly, move them to category three without any evidence. The only justification they have is if there's a safety concern and there was no science and indicated a safety concern. So it was improper. We have now remediated that by moving them back. - So this is a mess. People should know there are dangers. You don't have the ability to send them to independent lab before you inject. When you get them, they say on the bottles or the syringes. - For research use. - Oh wow. - Okay. - Yeah. - I have a lot of empathy for people who think, why not give it a try? Like there's no sort of cohesion when it comes to medical guidance, certainly in the United States. We have the government changing the food pyramid. There's real distrust and for good reason, some of the Maha community, some things that they're suggesting are very dangerous. Other things like better nutrition. I think you'd agree with, right? - Yeah, no, it's really troubling because we used to have this notion that all the things that are recommended for population health should have evidence to back them up. And now we are willing to see things supported with zero evidence and worse than that potential real harm. And so it's very troubling and it goes along the continuum of the anti-science, anti-vax, and what's so paradoxical here is you've got the same people who wouldn't take a vaccine, which has randomized trials, tens of thousands of people with overwhelming benefit to risk ratio. So none of it makes sense, really. - So what do you suggest to people? Because there is this feeling that, you know, I can do it. everything right. I can get the right amount of sleep, I can eat good food, I can get exercise, but I'm still breathing in microplastics or drinking forever chemicals. How do you empower individuals to feel that they can protect their health, especially the fact that a lot of these things require health insurance. We have a broken system. Yeah, we have a big problem here because we don't have the kind of universal health care that every other high-income country does have, so that our fragmented setup is very poorly positioned to integrate these new things. And not only we have the barriers that have been entrenched for many decades, but we also have now the people that are running the public health agencies that are going against evidence. So it's a troubling time. Still, everyone has agency to, as you say, do their best with their lifestyle factors in terms of air quality, particularly indoors. There's things you can do. There's reducing the plastic burden intake, keeping an eye on the things that are in your home regarding forever chemicals. It's not enough, Manouche, but yeah, it's difficult. This is not a good time, but it hopefully is just a transient one, and that will get back on track eventually. So if I go to see my doctor, what should I ask them? Because I feel like it hasn't really changed all that much in the last 20 years. What do you think people should be asking for? Well, you're already ahead of the curve on the Schingrich's vaccine, right? Oh, good, yes. And that tells me you're over 50. Yes. That's the good age to really get ahead of what you could be seeing when you're 70 plus. Because that's how long these diseases take to incubate. And of course, they start even before age 50. So the question is about heart disease. From that mammogram, why didn't you get the breast artery calcification defined to see if you're at high risk? They didn't know about it. Well, it hasn't your doctor given you a polygenic risk score for heart disease and all the common cancers and Alzheimer's disease. Can I ask for that now? Yeah. And why don't you have an APOE for it and know if you're at risk for Alzheimer's? It used to be, my name is Shedette. You wouldn't want to know because nothing you could do. That couldn't be further from the truth now because we know lifestyle has a big impact on at least deferring my years, the onset of mild cognitive impairment, no less Alzheimer's. So this idea of the Cassandra, you know, I don't want to know where past that stuff. So even if it doesn't run in my family, do you think it's worth asking for those? Well, yeah, the polygenic risk score, that set, basically it looks at every common disease, all the different cancers, atrial fibrillation, heart disease. And I think you know women, their biggest skill or is it heart disease and a lot of them don't know it. And when you think about your parents, just because it doesn't run in your mother or your father's lineage, the point is you're getting this combination of genes. You could have a very different type of risk when you have this combination of genomic variants. So that's why polygenic risk scores are independently useful in determining the risk of a person not discernible from their family history. Have you run the numbers on yourself like given everything you know, what sort of habits are you integrating into your life? What sort of medications, if I may ask, how are you trying to live as long and well as possible? Yeah, that's a very important question, because practice what you preach, right? Yeah. So doing all the research for super-agors changed my position. I always was an advocate for aerobics. And I had not done hardly any resistance training or balance training. And now I'm onto that several times a week. So that was a big change. The second big change for me was I had very chaotic sleep habits of staying up very late. And now that's a big thing. I've taken my deep sleep from various things, particularly regularity, up from a terrible number. It's in the right direction. I wish it was even better. In addition to all that, because my polygenic risk score tells me I'm at high risk for heart disease, even though it never was an either parent. I was taking a statin, but then I developed terrible muscle cramps. So I want to keep my LDL very low. And so I've done that with the injectable drug, Repatha that I take. And the polygenic risk score should be routine. I don't know why the medical community doesn't adopt it universally. But that helps to at least know about the risk. And of course, there are other ways, as I mentioned, that we will know. And it's especially in women, post-menopausal women. We got to know that person has got heart disease risk because there's so much we can do about that. Yeah, I feel like for women over 50, there's suddenly this new attention being paid on parry menopause, menopause, whether or not hormones are a good thing. There's certainly a lot of money being made on that. I read everything that's out there and I still don't know what to do. I feel like this abundance of information can make people a little crazy. Right. Yeah, I think if you stick to the evidence and not just opinions, there's evidence base and then there's eminence based stick to the former. You'll be okay. But you're only going to get that from the highest level of peer-reviewed journals and people who are committed to presenting the evidence in a forthright way. I mean, this is what happens when information goes everywhere. Part of us wants to just be told what to do. We want there to be easy to understand rules, guidelines that we can follow without having to overthink it. Some of us get a little weird if we have too many data points. But I think what you're saying is we are heading into an era of personalized medicine that is extraordinary and we need to do a better job to embrace it. Absolutely, particularly this field of longevity and healthy aging. It's a bit like this and misinformation that we saw throughout the COVID pandemic, we got to get this right because there's so much opportunity here to promote healthy aging that a lot of people are not really aware of. And if we do get on track with this and people do get the right word, it can make a world of difference in their healthy age lies. Just lifestyle alone has been shown. If you start age 50 and you tend to all the things that we know, you can get seven to 10 years more of healthy aging and people don't even know that. So there's so much we can get out there that's really high quality information that should help people. Right. And I think that was my biggest takeaway from your book that it's really never too late to start changing your aging destiny. We actually here at NPR partnered with Columbia University Medical School to do a clinical trial on the health benefits of incorporating short movement breaks into our days. We had 20,000 people sign up. I actually ended up writing a book about it that's coming out soon. And what we found was that older people actually had different challenges in terms of changing their lifestyle. You know, they're not stuck at a desk all day anymore. They're actually more active during the day, but these long periods of the evenings from say 5 p.m. to 11 p.m. They would sit. But when they took these movement breaks, it not only helped them sleep better, improved their mood and, you know, improved their glucose levels. Overall, they just felt healthier and it felt like a small thing they could do, you know, little changes can make a big difference. Absolutely. You can be stronger than ever in your life when you're in your 70s and 80s. You can have the highest level of fitness. And all sorts of other great things can come. I mean, you might have been a bad sleeper and, of course, as we age, our sleep, our ability increases, but you can counter that with so many different things in your daily life. So you're absolutely right. This is critical. People just because they're older shouldn't be thinking it's too late. In fact, there's great opportunities to promote healthy aging at all ages. That was Dr. Eric Topel. He's the author of Super Agers, an evidenced-based approach to longevity. You can hear his full talk at TED.com. And what a great reminder that technology is changing treatments fast, but don't believe everything you hear about quick medical fixes. Thank you so much for listening to our episode about being a Super Ager. This episode was produced by Phoebe Lett. It was edited by Sana's Meshkinpour and me. Our production staff at NPR also includes James De La Hussie, Katie Montellione, Fiona Gearen, Matthew Cloutier, Hersha Nahada, and Rachel Faulkner White. Our executive producer is Irene Nguucci. Our audio engineer was Jimmy Keely. Our theme music was written by Romteen Ara-Blui. Our partners at TED are Chris Anderson, Helen Walters, Roxanne Highlash, and Danielle Belorezzo. I'm Mnuchezamorodi and you've been listening to the TED Radio Hour from NPR.