Tally HealthTallyAge Test

The practical details.

Before you buy

Evidence & sources.

Are longevity blood tests and biological-age clocks worth it? Our evidence review grades the research as Not supported. That grade is about the claim, not about this product.

• Manufacturer claimTally calls TallyAge a "uniquely accurate and peer-reviewed epigenetic clock" optimized for accuracy and reproducibility. It also says that within 12 months, over 62% of members lowered their epigenetic age by an average of 2+ years.^{1, 15} The page names no study for the 62% figure and doesn't say how members were counted. Tally's own help center says fluctuations of around two years between tests are normal. That's about the size of the claimed average improvement.
• Manufacturer claimTally's terms say its programs, products and website do not constitute a diagnostic test. The product page carries a general FDA disclaimer and the label "lab analyzed", with no lab named.^{1, 6} No CLIA certificate, CAP accreditation or FDA clearance appears on the product page, help center articles or terms reviewed. The terms also let Tally keep information about your sample for future research and share de-identified data with its parent company.
• Independent testInfinite Epigenetics, which runs TruDiagnostic as a subsidiary, acquired Tally Health in an asset purchase announced April 29, 2026. NutraIngredients reported the deal the same day, and the company's release says Tally will remain a standalone consumer brand. Tally's terms, effective April 29, 2026, describe Tally Health as "a brand owned and operated by IE Tally Holdings, LLC, an affiliate of TruDiagnostic, Inc."^{6, 19, 20} TruDiagnostic sells the TruAge test, so Tally and TruAge now share an owner. Neither the article nor the release gives financial terms. Neither says whether Tally's samples will move to TruDiagnostic's CLIA-certified lab.
• Published studyThe CheekAge clock was built from cheek-swab DNA methylation data and questionnaires from 8,045 adults. In cross-validation it predicted age with an R² of 0.91 and a mean absolute error of 3.22 years. The mean replicate error was 0.85 years. In an independent set of 225 cheek samples, the mean absolute error was 3.48 years. The CheekAge gap was associated with factors including BMI, smoking, alcohol, stress, exercise and sleep quality. The authors say healthier lifestyles were predicted to lower the gap.^{13, 14, 16} Published in GeroScience in 2024 by authors affiliated with Tally Health. Tally's help center points to this paper as the basis for TallyAge but doesn't say the sold test uses the published model unchanged. The lifestyle links are associations and don't show that lowering the score improves health.
• Published studyIn 1,513 older adults from the Lothian Birth Cohorts of 1921 and 1936, CheekAge measured in blood predicted mortality. Each standard-deviation rise in the CheekAge gap carried a hazard ratio of 1.21, after adjusting for sex, age, cohort and cell types. That was comparable to the blood-trained DNAm PhenoAge clock (HR 1.23) and better than the first-generation clocks tested.¹⁷ This used blood samples, not cheek swabs, and the older arrays lacked nearly half of CheekAge's CpGs. Four of the six authors are current or former Tally Health employees, and Tally provided internal funding alongside the Wellcome Trust. Two co-authors are from the Lothian Birth Cohorts at the University of Edinburgh.
• Published studyA 2024 Nature Medicine review by Moqri and colleagues says no consensus exists on how biomarkers of aging should be validated before they're used in the clinic. It says rigorous validation will be critical to clinical use.¹⁸ The review covers aging biomarkers in general, not TallyAge specifically.

Is a CGM worth it if you don't have diabetes? What the evidence shows →