The above is a simplification. Precisions with Q&A:

• I am working on a gene therapy that wouldn't first be tried in people. Can't a mouse lifespan test suffice for a bronze medal? Yes, an alternative for bronze is to start with the silver conditions. Silver then also require the standard bronze conditions.
• I am working on a new meditation approach. It can't be tested in animals. Is a silver medal not reachable in less than a few decades? In such a case, an alternative for silver is statistical health improvements over two years + a continuous long-term surveillance. This, to react would long-term deleterious effects be observed
• I understand that N-of-1 trials are enough for badges. What about clinical trials? N-of-1 trials are for patients to appreciate what works for themselves (personalised medicine), clinical trials are to appreciate what works for others (health claims). Both can be randomised and double blind, both can be performed in a controlled environment, though this is ensured by regulation in the case of clinical trials. LTI will rank clinical trial evidence higher, all things being equal, than collections of N-of-1 trials weak evidence. The latter is OK for badges, as the likely best way at this stage to make the longevity space more test-centered. Besides, LTI will facilitate the inclusion to clinical trials as a positive gesture towards human health solutions.
• I made short-lived mice live 50% with my super product! What badge is that?. Sorry, none: there has been too many false positives with short-lived mice, where no life extension is then seen in long-lived mice. LTI will only accept non-short lived controls (at least 820 days of median lifespan for mice and rats) and above-normal treatment lifespans (at least 920). In order to encourage innovation such as relying on shrews and to avoid cheating with specific long-live strains, LTI may rely on references like https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2768517/table/T1/ - better contact LTI in advance for such innovations.
• Are there conflicts of interest with the team or the advisory board? LTI takes fees on tests and not further use but various if not all team and board members are/have or will be involved in methods to assess biological ages and solutions to aging. This creates both conflicts of interest on paper and a formidable know-how for longevity progress. The board and team were selected for their genuine will over the years to deliver human longevity and the rules here above apply in any case.