Longevity & healthspan · evidence-first
What actually works for longevity, and where to get it, without the hype.
We read the primary literature so you don't have to. Every claim is cited, every product comparison states the trade-offs, and we never sell prescription drugs. Start with the flagship compound or compare the supplements people actually ask about.
Start here
Each hub is a plain-language, cited guide to one compound or test, with an honest buying view where it applies.
Rapamycin The flagship. What the evidence shows, side effects, dosing debate, cost and access. 
Best NMN supplements NAD⁺ precursors compared by evidence, purity and dose, not by hype. 
NAD supplements What actually raises NAD⁺: NR vs NMN vs the rest. 
Resveratrol The bioavailability problem most brands skip. 
Urolithin A & Mitopure Mitophagy, and the 'you may already make it' nuance. 
Spermidine Autophagy, food sources, and the observational-vs-causal gap. 
Senolytics Fisetin and quercetin: clearing senescent cells, honestly assessed. 
Metformin for longevity The TAME trial, the exercise trade-off, and access. 
Biological age tests What epigenetic clocks measure, and their reliability limits. 
GLP-1 for longevity Semaglutide and tirzepatide beyond weight loss, and what aging data exists. 
Collagen for longevity Skin, joints and the difference between a measurable effect and a marketed one. The whole field, ranked by human evidence
Most roundups in this field rank by search volume and affiliate margin. This one ranks by a harder question: what does the human evidence actually show, and for which claim? That reorders things uncomfortably. The compounds with the deepest trial records are the ones nobody markets as anti-aging, and the ones marketed hardest have the thinnest data.
Humans are not big mice.
| Compound | Evidence | Best-supported claim | What the record shows | Our verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creatine | Strong human evidence | Preserves muscle and strength with age | Decades of randomized human trials | The best-evidenced thing here, and nobody markets it as anti-aging |
| GLP-1 drugs | Strong human evidence | Fewer cardiac events in people with cardiovascular disease | 17,604 randomized, 20% reduction | Best hard-outcome data in the field, in a disease population only |
| Omega-3 | Early / mixed evidence | A small epigenetic clock effect | Missed its primary endpoints in a 25,871-person trial | Cheap, sensible, and not the lifespan drug the lists imply |
| Vitamin D | Early / mixed evidence | Corrects a measured deficiency | No cancer or cardiovascular benefit in VITAL | Test first. Correcting a deficiency is not extending a lifespan |
| NAD precursors | Early / mixed evidence | Raises NAD+ levels | Short trials on surrogate markers | Does what it says to a marker; unproven on anything you would feel |
| NMN | Early / mixed evidence | Raises NAD+ levels | Same as above, plus a three-year FDA dispute | Lawful again since September 2025. Purity is the real risk |
| Urolithin A | Early / mixed evidence | Muscle endurance in older adults | Pivotal trial missed both primary endpoints | Genuine secondary-endpoint signal at the highest price in the category |
| Rapamycin | Early / mixed evidence | Extends lifespan in mice, reliably | Strongest animal record in the field, no human lifespan trial | The most interesting molecule here, and a prescription drug |
| Collagen | Early / mixed evidence | Skin elasticity over 8 to 12 weeks | Randomized skin trials; one affiliated aging study | Buy it for your skin. The glycine in it is the interesting part |
| Metformin | Early / mixed evidence | Proposed to delay age-related disease | TAME has published no efficacy results | The case has weakened, and it blunts exercise adaptation |
| Resveratrol | Limited evidence | Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity | Nine-year mortality study found no association | The cautionary tale this whole field should be read against |
| Spermidine | Limited evidence | Induces autophagy in cells | Supplementation did not raise plasma spermidine | Eat the wheat germ. Watch the trials |
| Senolytics | Limited evidence | Clears senescent cells in mice | Fisetin did not extend lifespan in the NIA ITP | The best idea in the field with the weakest product evidence |
How we grade evidence
A ranking is only useful if you know what it measures. Ours has four rungs, and every claim on this site is placed on one of them.
- Randomized human outcome data. A trial that measured something a person experiences, such as strength, a disease event or death.
- Randomized human surrogate data. A trial that measured a marker believed to track with aging, such as NAD+ levels or an epigenetic clock.
- Observational human data. Populations consuming more of something appear to do better, with all the confounding that implies.
- Animal data only. Real, often striking, and historically a poor predictor of what happens in people.
Almost every claim in this aisle rests on rung two or lower. That is not a scandal, it is the honest state of a young field. What is a problem is marketing that writes rung-two results in rung-one language. The clearest way to see the gap is our guide to ranking supplements by evidence, and the clearest way to check whether anything you take is doing something is what biological age tests can and cannot tell you.
What a proven compound would have to show
It is worth writing the bar down, because nothing on the table above has cleared it and knowing its shape makes every product page easier to read. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial in humans, adequately powered. A pre-specified primary endpoint that is an outcome rather than a marker. Years of follow-up rather than weeks. And replication by a group with no commercial stake in the answer.
Measured against that, every compound here is a candidate rather than a treatment. The field is early, not fraudulent, and those two conditions get confused constantly in both directions. The people telling you these molecules are proven are ahead of the evidence. So are the people telling you the whole area is worthless, because several of these compounds do reliably change the thing they claim to change, and a few of them cost very little to try.
Prescription drugs are a different kind of decision
Three entries in the table are prescription medicines rather than supplements: rapamycin, metformin and the GLP-1 receptor agonists. They sit in the same ranking because the evidence question is the same, and they carry a different decision. Each has contraindications, interactions and monitoring requirements that belong with a clinician who knows your history, and none has been approved anywhere for an aging indication. We explain them in full and we do not tell anyone where to buy them without a prescription.
Why trust this site
Per-claim citations
Every health claim links to primary literature (PubMed / DOI) or a reputable secondary source. No claim floats free.
Honest comparisons
Product roundups tell you who each option is not for, and rank by strength of human evidence, not by commission.
No prescription sales
Rapamycin, metformin and GLP-1 drugs are prescription-only. We explain them and point to legitimate routes, never a grey-market checkout.
We show our uncertainty
Where the human evidence is early or missing, we say so plainly. "Promising in mice" is not "proven in people."
The rules we hold ourselves to are written down in our editorial standards, including how we grade evidence and how we handle corrections. If you want to know who is behind the desk, start with about Rapamycin.store, and if you spot something wrong, tell us.
Latest guides
- What is rapamycin
- Rapamycin side effects
- How rapamycin works (mTOR)
- The hallmarks of aging
- Autophagy and fasting
- NMN vs NAD vs NR
- Bryan Johnson Blueprint
- Blue zones
These are the newest. Every explainer, dosing breakdown and evidence review lives in the full guide archive.
Common questions about the supplements and drugs on this site
Frequently asked questions
What actually works for longevity?
Nothing in a bottle beats not smoking, staying metabolically healthy, sleeping properly and doing resistance training. Among supplements, ranked by human evidence rather than popularity, creatine and omega-3 have the deepest randomized data. Nothing sold in this category has been shown to extend human lifespan.
Has any supplement been proven to extend human lifespan?
No. Several reliably move a marker such as NAD+ levels or an epigenetic clock. None has demonstrated longer life in a randomized trial, and the distinction between moving a marker and changing an outcome is the single most useful thing to hold on to in this field.
How do you grade evidence on this site?
Four rungs: randomized human outcome data, randomized human surrogate data, observational human data, and animal data only. Almost every claim in the supplement aisle sits on rung two or lower, and we say which rung each claim occupies.
Do you sell anything?
We do not sell prescription drugs, and we never point to grey-market sources for rapamycin, metformin or GLP-1 medicines. Where we compare consumer supplements we disclose affiliate relationships on the page.
Which compound has the strongest animal evidence?
Rapamycin, by a clear margin. It extends lifespan in mice reliably and dose-responsively, in the field's most rigorous multi-site program. It has no human lifespan trial and it is a prescription drug with real side effects.
Which has the strongest human evidence?
GLP-1 receptor agonists, on hard outcomes, in people who already have cardiovascular disease. That is a genuinely different class of evidence from everything else discussed here, and it does not transfer to a metabolically healthy person.
Why do your verdicts disagree with other sites in this field?
Because we rank by the strength of the human evidence and state the criterion, rather than ranking by search volume or commission. That reorders the field considerably, and it puts the least glamorous compounds at the top.
Where should I start?
If you want the flagship compound, start with the rapamycin evidence review. If you are assembling a routine, start with the evidence-ranked supplement guide. If you want to measure anything, start with what biological age tests can and cannot tell you.
How often is this updated?
Pages carry a visible reviewed date and every claim links to a primary source. When a trial reports or a regulator changes position, the affected pages are rewritten rather than patched.
Is any of this medical advice?
No. Everything here is informational. Rapamycin, metformin and GLP-1 drugs are prescription medicines and any longevity use is off-label, which is a conversation for a licensed clinician who knows your history.
Own a longevity or health brand?
Rapamycin.store publishes sponsored and guest posts on an aged, topically-relevant domain, and offers display advertising. Tell us what you want to promote and we'll send our current options.