AI tool uses selfies to predict biological age and cancer survival
By Issam AHMED
Doctors often start exams with the so-called "eyeball test" -- a snap judgment about whether the patient appears older or younger than their age, which can influence key medical decisions.
That intuitive assessment may soon get an AI upgrade.
FaceAge, a deep learning algorithm described in The Lancet Digital Health, converts a simple headshot into a number that more accurately reflects a person's biological age rather than the birthday on their chart.
Trained on tens of thousands of photographs, it pegged cancer patients on average as biologically five years older than healthy peers. The study's authors say it could help doctors decide who can safely tolerate punishing treatments, and who might fare better with a gentler approach.
"We hypothesize that FaceAge could be used as a biomarker in cancer care to quantify a patient's biological age and help a doctor make these tough decisions," said co-senior author Raymond Mak, an oncologist at Mass Brigham Health, a Harvard-affiliated health system in Boston.
Consider two hypothetical patients: a spry 75‑year‑old whose biological age clocks in at 65, and a frail 60‑year‑old whose biology reads 70. Aggressive radiation might be appropriate for the former but risky for the latter.
The same logic could help guide decisions about heart surgery, hip replacements or end-of-life care.
Growing evidence shows humans age at different rates, shaped by genes, stress, exercise, and habits like smoking or drinking. While pricey genetic tests can reveal how DNA wears over time, FaceAge promises insight using only a selfie.
The model was trained on 58,851 portraits of presumed-healthy adults over 60, culled from public datasets.
It was then tested on 6,196 cancer patients treated in the United States and the Netherlands, using photos snapped just before radiotherapy. Patients with malignancies looked on average 4.79 years older biologically than their chronological age.
Among cancer patients, a higher FaceAge score strongly predicted worse survival -- even after accounting for actual age, sex, and tumor type -- and the hazard rose steeply for anyone whose biological reading tipped past 85.
Intriguingly, FaceAge appears to weigh the signs of aging differently than humans do. For example, being gray-haired or balding matters less than subtle changes in facial muscle tone.
FaceAge boosted doctors' accuracy, too. Eight physicians were asked to examine headshots of terminal cancer patients and guess who would die within six months. Their success rate barely beat chance; with FaceAge data in hand, predictions improved sharply.
The model even affirmed a favorite internet meme, estimating actor Paul Rudd's biological age as 43 in a photo taken when he was 50.
AI tools have faced scrutiny for under‑serving non-white people. Mak said preliminary checks revealed no significant racial bias in FaceAge's predictions, but the group is training a second‑generation model on 20,000 patients.
They're also probing how factors like makeup, cosmetic surgery or room lighting variations could fool the system.
Ethics debates loom large. An AI that can read biological age from a selfie could prove a boon for clinicians, but also tempting for life insurers or employers seeking to gauge risk.
"It is for sure something that needs attention, to assure that these technologies are used only in the benefit for the patient," said Hugo Aerts, the study's co-lead who directs MGB's AI in medicine program.
Another dilemma: What happens when the mirror talks back? Learning that your body is biologically older than you thought may spur healthy changes -- or sow anxiety.
The researchers are planning to open a public-facing FaceAge portal where people can upload their own pictures to enroll in a research study to further validate the algorithm. Commercial versions aimed at clinicians may follow, but only after more validation.
© 2025 AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Kyodo News
3 days ago
- Kyodo News
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts - Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus," the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find nongovernment funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost," Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. "It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day." John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were canceled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard," she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
Japan Today
6 days ago
- Japan Today
Study reveals potato's secret tomato past
A peasant steps on potatoes to begin the elaboration of chuno (dehydrated potato) in Machacamarca, Bolivia, on June 30, 2021 By Issam AHMED You say potato, I say tomato? Turns out one helped create the other: Natural interbreeding between wild tomatoes and potato-like plants in South America gave rise to the modern day spud around nine million years ago, according to a new study published in the journal Cell. Co-author Loren Rieseberg, a professor at the University of British Columbia, told AFP the findings point to a "profound shift" in evolutionary biology, as scientists increasingly recognize the role of ancient hybridization events in shaping the Tree of Life. While it was once thought that random mutations were by far the biggest driver of new species, "we now agree that the creative role of hybridization has been underestimated," he said. Simple, affordable and versatile, the humble potato is now one of the world's most important crops. But its origins have long puzzled scientists. Modern potato plants closely resemble three species from Chile known as Etuberosum. However, these plants do not produce tubers -- the large underground structures, like those found in potatoes and yams, that store nutrients and are the parts we eat. On the other hand, genetic analysis has revealed a surprising closeness to tomatoes. "This is known as discordance, and indicates something interesting is going on!" co-author Sandra Knapp, a research botanist at Britain's Natural History Museum, told AFP. To solve the mystery, an international team of researchers analyzed 450 genomes from cultivated potatoes and 56 wild potato species. Lead author Zhiyang Zhang, of the Agricultural Genomics Institute at Shenzhen, said in a statement: "Wild potatoes are very difficult to sample, so this dataset represents the most comprehensive collection of wild potato genomic data ever analysed." The analysis revealed that modern potatoes carry a balanced genetic legacy from two ancestral species -- roughly 60 percent from Etuberosum and 40 percent from tomatoes. "My wow moment was when the Chinese team showed that ALL potatoes, wild species as well as land races, had basically the same proportion of tomato genes and Etuberosum genes," said Knapp. "That really points to an ancient hybridization event rather than various events of gene exchange later on," she added. "It is so clear cut! Beautiful." One gene called SP6A, a signal for tuberization, came from the tomato lineage. But it only enabled tuber formation when paired with the IT1 gene from Etuberosum, which controls underground stem growth. The divergence between Etuberosum and tomatoes is thought to have begun 14 million years ago -- possibly due to off-target pollination by insects -- and completed nine million years ago. This evolutionary event coincided with the rapid uplift of the Andes mountain range, providing ideal conditions for the emergence of tuber-bearing plants that could store nutrients underground. Another key feature of tubers is their ability to reproduce asexually, sprouting new buds without the need for seeds or pollination -- a trait that helped them spread across South America, and through later human exchange, around the globe. Co-author Sanwen Huang, a professor at the Agricultural Genomics Institute at Shenzhen, told AFP that his lab is now working on a new hybrid potato that can be reproduced by seeds to accelerate breeding. This study suggests that using the tomato "as a chassis of synthetic biology" is a promising route for creating this new potato, he said. © 2025 AFP
Japan Today
17-06-2025
- Japan Today
AI chatbots need more books to learn from. These libraries are opening their stacks
By MATT O'BRIEN Everything ever said on the internet was just the start of teaching artificial intelligence about humanity. Tech companies are now tapping into an older repository of knowledge: the library stacks. Nearly one million books published as early as the 15th century — and in 254 languages — are part of a Harvard University collection being released to AI researchers Thursday. Also coming soon are troves of old newspapers and government documents held by Boston's public library. Cracking open the vaults to centuries-old tomes could be a data bonanza for tech companies battling lawsuits from living novelists, visual artistsand others whose creative works have been scooped up without their consent to train AI chatbots. 'It is a prudent decision to start with public domain data because that's less controversial right now than content that's still under copyright,' said Burton Davis, a deputy general counsel at Microsoft. Davis said libraries also hold 'significant amounts of interesting cultural, historical and language data' that's missing from the past few decades of online commentary that AI chatbots have mostly learned from. Supported by 'unrestricted gifts' from Microsoft and ChatGPT maker OpenAI, the Harvard-based Institutional Data Initiative is working with libraries around the world on how to make their historic collections AI-ready in a way that also benefits libraries and the communities they serve. 'We're trying to move some of the power from this current AI moment back to these institutions,' said Aristana Scourtas, who manages research at Harvard Law School's Library Innovation Lab. 'Librarians have always been the stewards of data and the stewards of information.' Harvard's newly released dataset, Institutional Books 1.0, contains more than 394 million scanned pages of paper. One of the earlier works is from the 1400s — a Korean painter's handwritten thoughts about cultivating flowers and trees. The largest concentration of works is from the 19th century, on subjects such as literature, philosophy, law and agriculture, all of it meticulously preserved and organized by generations of librarians. It promises to be a boon for AI developers trying to improve the accuracy and reliability of their systems. 'A lot of the data that's been used in AI training has not come from original sources,' said the data initiative's executive director, Greg Leppert, who is also chief technologist at Harvard's Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society. This book collection goes "all the way back to the physical copy that was scanned by the institutions that actually collected those items,' he said. Before ChatGPT sparked a commercial AI frenzy, most AI researchers didn't think much about the provenance of the passages of text they pulled from Wikipedia, from social media forums like Reddit and sometimes from deep repositories of pirated books. They just needed lots of what computer scientists call tokens — units of data, each of which can represent a piece of a word. Harvard's new AI training collection has an estimated 242 billion tokens, an amount that's hard for humans to fathom but it's still just a drop of what's being fed into the most advanced AI systems. Facebook parent company Meta, for instance, has said the latest version of its AI large language model was trained on more than 30 trillion tokens pulled from text, images and videos. Meta is also battling a lawsuit from comedian Sarah Silverman and other published authors who accuse the company of stealing their books from 'shadow libraries' of pirated works. Now, with some reservations, the real libraries are standing up. OpenAI, which is also fighting a string of copyright lawsuits, donated $50 million this year to a group of research institutions including Oxford University's 400-year-old Bodleian Library, which is digitizing rare texts and using AI to help transcribe them. When the company first reached out to the Boston Public Library, one of the biggest in the U.S., the library made clear that any information it digitized would be for everyone, said Jessica Chapel, its chief of digital and online services. 'OpenAI had this interest in massive amounts of training data. We have an interest in massive amounts of digital objects. So this is kind of just a case that things are aligning,' Chapel said. Digitization is expensive. It's been painstaking work, for instance, for Boston's library to scan and curate dozens of New England's French-language newspapers that were widely read in the late 19th and early 20th century by Canadian immigrant communities from Quebec. Now that such text is of use as training data, it helps bankroll projects that librarians want to do anyway. 'We've been very clear that, 'Hey, we're a public library,'" Chapel said. 'Our collections are held for public use, and anything we digitized as part of this project will be made public.' Harvard's collection was already digitized starting in 2006 for another tech giant, Google, in its controversial project to create a searchable online library of more than 20 million books. Google spent years beating back legal challenges from authors to its online book library, which included many newer and copyrighted works. It was finally settled in 2016 when the U.S. Supreme Court let stand lower court rulings that rejected copyright infringement claims. Now, for the first time, Google has worked with Harvard to retrieve public domain volumes from Google Books and clear the way for their release to AI developers. Copyright protections in the U.S. typically last for 95 years, and longer for sound recordings. How useful all of this will be for the next generation of AI tools remains to be seen as the data gets shared Thursday on the Hugging Face platform, which hosts datasets and open-source AI models that anyone can download. The book collection is more linguistically diverse than typical AI data sources. Fewer than half the volumes are in English, though European languages still dominate, particularly German, French, Italian, Spanish and Latin. A book collection steeped in 19th century thought could also be 'immensely critical' for the tech industry's efforts to build AI agents that can plan and reason as well as humans, Leppert said. 'At a university, you have a lot of pedagogy around what it means to reason,' Leppert said. 'You have a lot of scientific information about how to run processes and how to run analyses.' At the same time, there's also plenty of outdated data, from debunked scientific and medical theories to racist narratives. 'When you're dealing with such a large data set, there are some tricky issues around harmful content and language," said Kristi Mukk, a coordinator at Harvard's Library Innovation Lab who said the initiative is trying to provide guidance about mitigating the risks of using the data, to 'help them make their own informed decisions and use AI responsibly.' © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
