Longevity Guru Showdown.
Five protocols compete for your attention. Whose system do you actually run? Cast a single vote, then see what the crowd does.
Bryan Johnson vs Peter Attia — what's the actual difference?+
Attia is a physician focused on screening and the four horsemen of premature death (CVD, cancer, neurodegenerative, metabolic). He prescribes aggressive Zone 2, strength, lipid management, and selective off-label drugs (rapamycin, metformin in some cases). Johnson treats his body as a measurable system — ~80 weekly biomarkers, ~100 daily supplements, a ~$2M/year spend. Attia is the conservative, evidence-graded camp; Johnson is the maximalist, measurement-first camp.
Whose protocol has the most evidence behind it?+
On a per-recommendation basis, Attia's book Outlive cites the most peer-reviewed support. Huberman's podcast format also leans heavily on PubMed citations. Johnson's Blueprint publishes all biomarkers and changes openly but is a single-N experiment, not an RCT. Patrick is the most rigorous on micronutrient/sauna evidence specifically. Sisson is the most ancestral-pattern / lowest-tech.
Do I have to pick just one to follow?+
No. The shared baseline across every named guru is the same: 7+ hours sleep, 3+ strength sessions, 150+ minutes Zone 2 cardio, mostly-whole-food diet, no smoking, morning sunlight, regular sauna if available, yearly ApoB + Lp(a) + hsCRP + HbA1c labs. Start there. Layer in protocol-specific items only after the baseline is in place.
Is the Bryan Johnson Blueprint protocol worth following?+
For most readers, full Blueprint is impractical: cost, supplement burden, and the time/measurement load are high. The freely available subset that's within everyone's reach — the diet, sleep window, exercise mix — is reasonable. The headline supplement stack is the part with the weakest individual evidence per dollar.
How is Peter Attia's Medicine 3.0 different from regular preventive medicine?+
Mainly in time horizon and aggressiveness. Medicine 3.0 (per Outlive) starts intervention 20–30 years earlier than guideline-based primary prevention, uses ApoB and Lp(a) instead of LDL-C alone, treats VO2 max and Zone 2 as core vitals, and is willing to use medications (statins, GLP-1s, in some cases rapamycin) at earlier risk thresholds than the standard clinical guidelines recommend.
Does Andrew Huberman have a single "Huberman protocol"?+
No — Huberman Lab is a podcast that ships dozens of separate behavioral protocols (morning sunlight, NSDR/yoga nidra, deliberate cold exposure, caffeine timing, sleep hygiene, dopamine management). There is no master stack. Pick by goal — most are zero-cost, time-only interventions.
Why is "none" a valid answer?+
Following no individual guru and reading primary literature is a coherent stance — it avoids personality-driven recommendations that don't replicate, and it forces you to evaluate evidence by sample size and effect size rather than by who said it. The downside is throughput: most people can't sustain it.
Why guru protocols diverge so much
Every named protocol you hear about — Bryan Johnson's Blueprint, Peter Attia's Medicine 3.0, Andrew Huberman's behavioral stacks, Rhonda Patrick's micronutrient + hormesis playbook, Mark Sisson's Primal Blueprint — is a different bet on the same underlying biology. They disagree on dose, frequency, and which lever moves the most mortality risk, not on whether sleep, exercise, nutrition, and sun exposure matter.
Attia organizes everything around the four horsemen of premature death (cardiovascular disease, cancer, neurodegenerative disease, metabolic disease) and biases toward aggressive screening + Zone 2 + strength. Johnson treats the body as a measurable system and optimizes ~80 biomarkers weekly with a ~$2M/year stack. Huberman extracts behavioral protocols from peer-reviewed papers and ships them to a 5M+ subscriber audience for free. Patrick centers food-first + sauna + omega-3, citing the Finnish KIHD cohort and the FoundMyFitness deep dives. Sisson is the lowest-intensity branch — ancestral diet, daily slow movement, no chronic stress.
What they actually agree on
Strip out the personality and the headline supplements and the overlap is large: 7+ hours sleep, multiple strength sessions per week, 150+ minutes of Zone 2 cardio, mostly-whole-food diet, no smoking, sunlight in the first 30 minutes of the day, regular sauna or heat exposure if available, and full lipid + ApoB + Lp(a) + HbA1c + hsCRP blood work at least yearly. Every named guru would sign off on that baseline.
Most disagreements are at the margin: rapamycin (Attia: yes off-label, Johnson: yes, others: cautious), NMN/NR (Johnson + Patrick: yes, Attia: skeptical), high-dose B-complex, peptides like BPC-157, and how much weight to put on continuous glucose monitoring for healthy individuals.
See how you compare.
Get the weekly research drop — what the audience actually does, plus the protocols I'm testing on myself. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.