Choose from 60+ interventions across supplements, exercise, nutrition, sleep, and lab testing. Every item is graded A–D (Rx for prescription drugs): supplements on randomized trials, habits on the overall evidence. Build your plan, see what the evidence supports, and share it.
The most common longevity stack mistake is starting with exotic, expensive interventions before establishing the foundational ones. A well-designed stack has a logical hierarchy — from the highest-evidence, lowest-risk foundations to the more speculative interventions layered on top.
Before considering any supplement, put the habits with the strongest evidence in place: regular aerobic activity (US guidelines suggest 150–300 minutes a week of moderate activity), muscle-strengthening work on 2 or more days a week, a consistent sleep routine, a Mediterranean-style diet with adequate protein, not smoking and limiting alcohol. In a 2022 meta-analysis, any resistance training was associated with 15% lower all-cause mortality, with the largest reduction (27%) at about 60 minutes a week.
On the supplement side, only creatine has Grade A evidence in this tool: combined with resistance training, it improves lean mass and muscle function in older adults. Fish oil, magnesium and vitamin D are no longer graded A here: in the large VITAL trial, neither fish oil nor vitamin D prevented heart disease or cancer in generally healthy adults, and the best trial evidence for magnesium is a small reduction in blood pressure. Correcting a diagnosed deficiency is a different matter; ask your clinician.
Once the foundation is in place, a few supplements have moderate evidence for specific uses, such as berberine for blood sugar and cholesterol, but none is shown to slow aging. Taurine gained significant credibility from the Singh et al. Science 2023 paper identifying taurine deficiency as a conserved feature of aging, but a 2025 study found that blood taurine levels rose or stayed flat with age in three human cohorts, monkeys and mice, which argues against falling taurine as a universal feature of aging (Fernandez et al., Science 2025). Creatine has been safe in long-term use of up to 5 years in healthy people; research on brain effects is at an early stage. NMN and NR raise blood NAD+ in people, but whether that improves health has not been shown, and long-term safety is unknown (Grade C).
Sauna use deserves mention here: in a Finnish cohort of men (Laukkanen et al., JAMA Intern Med 2015), more frequent sauna bathing was associated with lower risk of fatal cardiovascular disease and of death from any cause. The data are observational, so the habit is graded C here.
Rapamycin, metformin, GLP-1 agonists, and acarbose have the most compelling longevity mechanistic profiles of any interventions in this database — and all require physician oversight. This is not bureaucratic caution; it reflects genuine safety considerations. Rapamycin's immunosuppressive effects at continuous dosing are real and potentially dangerous. Long-term metformin use is linked to lower vitamin B12 levels, so B12 is worth checking. GLP-1 drugs reduced cardiovascular events in large trials of people with obesity or diabetes, but they require medical supervision and gradual dose increases.
Metformin’s longevity case still rests on observational data and animal studies. The TAME trial, designed to test it in about 3,000 older adults, has not published any results, so there is no trial evidence yet that metformin slows aging in people without diabetes. That uncertainty belongs in any conversation with your physician. For rapamycin, pulsed weekly dosing (the Blagosklonny protocol) is the current hypothesis for capturing longevity benefits while limiting immunosuppression, but this remains unproven in human RCTs.
Grade A (strong): Consistent evidence for the stated benefit: randomized trials for supplements and tests, and for habits, consistent results across large cohort studies and trials where they exist.
Grade B (moderate): Benefits on intermediate measures, such as blood pressure or blood sugar, or good but less consistent evidence on outcomes.
Grade C (limited or mixed): Mostly animal or observational evidence, or small, short or conflicting trials.
Grade D (evidence against): Good trials found no benefit for the main promoted use, or found harm.
Rx (prescription): Prescription drugs, which need physician supervision; any use for aging is off-label and unproven.
The evidence score is the average grade of the items in your stack (A = 12 points, B = 8, C = 4, D = 0, Rx = 4), scaled to 100. Because it is an average, adding weakly supported items lowers it. It describes the evidence behind your choices, not how much benefit to expect.
This tool is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. No intervention should be started or stopped without consulting a qualified physician, particularly any Rx-grade items.
When major longevity trials publish, we review the evidence grades. Subscribe to hear what changed.