Vol. IV · No. 19
Tuesday, June 23, 2026
Issue: Spring · 2026
Established · MMXXVI
— The evidence base for longevity medicine —
Indexed by PubMed · CTG · Cochrane
Editorial team · geroevidence.com
Subscription · app.geroevidence.com
Geroevidence · Editorial desk · Evidence Analysis

Evidence Analysis

How to read the evidence — study design, bias, and interpretation.

6 articles in this category · ← All categories
§ Evidence Analysis · 6 articles
The best-evidenced longevity drugs in 2026, ranked by trial data
Every longevity compound currently tracked on Geroevidence, ranked by evidence strength rather than hype — from Phase III outcome trials down to early-stage signals.
June 24, 2026  ·  12 min read
Why most longevity supplements lack human trial data
A structural explanation of why most longevity supplements have animal data but not human outcome trials — and how to tell the difference when evaluating a claim.
June 24, 2026  ·  8 min read
NAD+ IV therapy vs. NMN and NR supplements: comparing the evidence
NAD+ IV drips have become a popular wellness-clinic offering. Here is how the evidence for IV NAD+ compares to oral NMN and NR precursors.
June 24, 2026  ·  10 min read
Berberine vs. metformin: is "nature's Ozempic" backed by longevity evidence?
Berberine has been called "nature's Ozempic" online. Here is how its actual human trial evidence compares to metformin's.
June 24, 2026  ·  10 min read
Dasatinib + quercetin vs. fisetin: comparing the senolytic evidence
A direct comparison of the two leading senolytic approaches — mechanism, current human trial data, and evidence strength, rated honestly.
June 23, 2026  ·  11 min read
NMN vs NR: comparing the evidence for the two main NAD+ precursors
A direct head-to-head comparison of every published human trial for NMN and NR — evidence rated honestly, and what the first head-to-head trial will tell us.
May 8, 2026  ·  9 min read