Longevity Protocols Project Methodology
The goal of the Longevity Protocols project is to provide you with tools and knowledge to help you create a personalized health and longevity plan. The key principle is that every intervention, therapy, or strategy you choose should be based on solid, reliable scientific research.
Methodology of the project is based on the scientific method, which forms the foundation for all actions in the health field. This means that every intervention you consider must be thoroughly verified in terms of scientific evidence. The aim of this project is to introduce you to the most effective strategies that can truly impact your health for the better.
All data presented in the Longevity Protocols project comes from reliable, verified scientific sources such as PubMed, Cochrane, Nature, Science, or JAMA.
We do not accept any sources that do not meet rigorous scientific standards, such as blogs, advertising sites, or sponsored materials. Every intervention described has been assessed based on data from rigorous studies.
Evidence Grading System
In the Longevity Protocols project, we use an evidence grading system that allows us to evaluate the effectiveness and credibility of individual interventions. We rely on solid research, and each intervention is assessed according to the available scientific evidence on the subject.
There are five main categories in which we evaluate the evidence:
1 – Strong Evidence ()
Description: This category includes interventions with the strongest scientific support. These are usually meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) confirming the effectiveness of a given therapy in humans. The evidence is robust, reliable, and based on large sample sizes. Good examples include studies on the effects of physical activity on heart health or the effectiveness of a plant-based diet in preventing metabolic diseases.
Example: A meta-analysis examining the effectiveness of red light therapy in reducing inflammation, with clear results—therapy works in humans.
2 – Good ()
Description: The evidence in this category is still quite strong, but may come from smaller study groups or clinical trials of mixed quality. Often, these are clinical studies with smaller samples or studies indicating effectiveness but requiring further research in larger groups.
Example: Clinical studies on the effect of dietary supplements on improving brain function. The results are promising, but larger studies are still needed to confirm long-term benefits.
3 – Preliminary ()
Description: This category includes evidence suggesting possible intervention effectiveness, but mostly comes from animal studies that have not yet been widely confirmed in humans. Many of these findings are promising, but there is still insufficient data regarding safety and efficacy for humans.
Example: Animal studies showing that a particular substance may help cell regeneration, but no clinical trials on humans have been conducted yet.
4 – Speculative ()
Description: The evidence in this category is mainly anecdotal, in vitro studies (in test tubes), or very early hypotheses. These interventions are promising but there is no credible evidence to confirm them in humans yet. These are often ideas that may lead to further research but cannot be relied on in practice.
Example: Conducting in vitro experiments showing that a supplement works on cells in the lab, but no studies on humans have been done yet.
Why is it important?
Understanding the level of evidence for different interventions is crucial because it allows us to make informed decisions.
Knowledge about the quality of evidence allows us to distinguish effective, proven therapies from those that may be merely speculation or potentially dangerous ideas.
In the Longevity Protocols project, we describe only verified and proven information that will help you make conscious decisions for long-term health, while minimizing the risk associated with unproven theories or pseudoscience.
The scientific method is the foundation. Here, we rely only on data provided by research. Not on what seems right to us or to some influencer.
Remember, the effectiveness of actions in the field of longevity is not a one-time thing but a process that requires time, monitoring, and, above all, a foundation in solid, scientific evidence.
Also remember that science is imperfect. It can be ambiguous. It can change. But it is the best we have, and our entire civilization, all technology, and all our technical achievements were built on the scientific method, which is why it is also the foundation of this project.