Calibrated Signal · Early access
The Stack Report Card
Enter what you take and do. Get a plain-English read on how well your longevity stack covers the biology of aging, graded on human evidence. Nothing to buy. No sponsors.
It opens in December 2026. Leave your email and you hear first, and you get in first.
Most longevity stacks are built one podcast at a time.
One supplement came from a podcast, another from a video, a third from a doctor who mentioned it once. Nobody checked whether the pieces fit together, which parts of aging they actually touch, or whether the human evidence behind each one holds up.
The report card does that check. You list what you take and do: supplements, medications, devices, exercise, sleep, nutrition patterns. It maps every item to the hallmarks of aging, the biological processes that drive aging at the cellular level, and grades the evidence behind each one. Your stack gets one of five words, not a number: exemplary, solid, mixed, thin, or speculative.
What you’ll find out
- Which parts of aging you cover, and which whole systems go untouched.
- Where you are paying for overlap: several items doing the same job.
- Which items have real human evidence, and which rest on a mouse that got it injected.
- Whether the dose that was studied is the dose in your bottle, or triple it.
- Whether the form you bought is absorbed, or never makes it past your gut.
- How many of the studies behind each item were run by the maker.
- Which items should not be combined: several that all thin the blood, or all lower blood sugar, flagged alongside common prescriptions.
A sample read
From a sample stack, not a real person
- 6 of the 9 aging systems you can act on: covered
- 3 systems still thin or untouched, named
- 3 items working through the same pathway: you are paying twice
- 1 item with no human evidence (mouse-only, injected)
- 3 items that each affect platelet function, flagged for your prescriber
The grade is measured against the nine aging systems that today’s evidence can actually move. Four more are on the map but cannot be changed by anything with evidence yet: telomere maintenance, cellular recycling, stem-cell renewal, and immune aging. Your read shows them too, labeled not addressable yet.
How each item is graded
Every intervention is scored against the hallmarks of aging on six things. Mechanism strength: whether the biology plausibly connects. Evidence quality: whether the data comes from a dish, an animal, or a human outcome. Dose realism: whether the dose that was studied is the dose that is sold. Safety and interactions. Bioavailability: whether the form you bought is absorbed at all. And a conflict-of-interest review: who paid for the studies. Where a study has measured a biological-age clock, the report notes whether the intervention moved it.
A grade is a read on the published evidence, not a prescription. The report card does not measure your biological age, and it is not medical advice. It tells you what the research supports, where it is thin, and what to ask your own clinician about.
Who built it
I spent fifteen years building and running supplement and wellness companies, so I know how a claim is manufactured before it reaches a label. After that I spent three and a half years in cancer-epigenetics research, and I am now a PhD candidate in bioinformatics and computational biology and an emergency nurse at Mayo Clinic. The report card grew out of my PhD work mapping published studies to the hallmarks of aging. An 80% coronary blockage at 44, after doing most of what the optimization world recommends, is why I built it.
No supplement line. No sponsors. The report card never sells you a product. More about me.
Until it opens
The weekly essays teach the same lenses the report card uses: mechanism, evidence quality, conflicts of interest, dose and form. Browse the articles while you wait, and leave your email below so you are first in.