Chapter 6 · § 6.1 · Recipe

Aggregate Results Across Cohorts

The headline numbers that stabilized across three trials.

By Sultan Meghji · Updated March 2026 · Last reviewed March 2026 · ~5 min

Problem

Three cohort experiments between 2022 and 2024. Dozens of participants. A personal n=1 on top. When the data from all of it was aggregated, what held up?

Solution

Four headline numbers, stable across cohorts.

Metric	Aggregate across three cohorts (2022–2024), 12–18 month protocol windows
Heart rate variability (HRV)	3–5× improvement
Weight loss (average)	>10%
Sleep duration	+30–40 minutes / night
GI inflammatory markers	9–57% reduction

And the personal n=1, measured with a third-party biological-age assessment:

Author n=1	Outcome
Biological age	Dropped ~10 years
Relative to chronological	>5 years younger
Total out-of-pocket	< $3,000 / year one

ℹ Note These are aggregate signals from small cohorts, not a randomized clinical trial. They are completer-cohort numbers, not intent-to-treat — keeps the science honest. I treat them as signal, not proof. The fact that they held across three separate cohorts — and on my own body — is what makes me confident enough to publish.

Discussion

HRV. Tripling to quintupling HRV is the kind of change you only see with sustained athletic training over twelve to eighteen months, which is what the protocol-window number reflects. The cleaner short-window read is the Cohort 3 result: men hitting the >170 bpm × 30+ minutes × 2 sessions/week protocol saw 20%+ HRV gains in the first forty-five days, then compounded across the rest of the program. The driver in the cohorts was nearly always the combination of strength training + structured interval work + sleep discipline, not any supplement. See § 4.3 for the dose-response structure.

Weight loss. >10% average across mixed populations. A small number of outliers exceeded 20% — usually men carrying more excess mass at baseline, sometimes women whose data surfaced a specific genetic or allergy signal that finally got addressed (the § 6.4 biotin case is the cleanest example).

Sleep. +30–40 minutes is not a supplement effect. It is the sleep protocol in § 4.4, applied consistently for 60+ days. That alone outperforms most longevity supplements ever marketed.

GI inflammation. A 9–57% reduction in panel markers reflects how much room there was to take silent inflammation down in an over-40 cohort. The specific intervention came out of the IgE / IgA / GI panel (§ 2.3) combined with genetic and bloodwork signal.

What the aggregate does not tell you is the segment breakdown. The over-35 cohort responded much more strongly than the under-35 cohort. Gender mattered. Prior athletic history mattered. The per-segment story is in § 6.3.