Consensus vs AgingResearch.News
Choose Consensus for
Researchers, students and clinicians who bring a question, in any field of science, and want an answer and a literature review drawn from its papers.
Choose AgingResearch.News for
People who work on aging and want the new research brought to them: every new paper judged for what it shows about aging, plain stories about the ones worth reading, and each treatment's evidence on one page.
Side by side
- What it is
- AgingResearch.News A reader of aging research: feeds, stories, evidence pages and Ask
- Consensus An AI search engine and workspace for scientific research1
- New papers
- AgingResearch.News Each new paper from PubMed, bioRxiv, medRxiv, arXiv and more, read as it appears and judged for what its own work shows about aging; about 1 in 20 reaches the feeds.
- Consensus Papers found when you search or ask1
- Fields
- AgingResearch.News Aging research only: biology, clinical work, AI and data, and the field's trials, grants, companies and news.
- Consensus All fields: “220M+ peer-reviewed papers and preprints”, its MCP page says4
- Answers
- AgingResearch.News Ask AgingResearch.News answers from the papers it has read, every claim cited, animal and cell results kept apart from human ones: 3 questions a day free, 20 with Plus.
- Consensus Answers to your questions: 10 Pro messages a month free, unlimited on Pro2
- Literature reviews
- AgingResearch.News Ultradeep writes a five-section review: one with a free account, 3 a week with Plus.
- Consensus Deep reviews: 3 a month free, 15 on Pro, 200 on Deep2
Where Consensus is stronger
- It covers every field of science, so it answers questions far outside aging.
- It runs literature reviews at volume: up to 200 Deep reviews a month on its top plan, against 3 Ultradeep reviews a week on Plus.
- It is further along in AI assistants: it reports 7 million uses of its MCP server and offers a search API.
- It sells to institutions, with single sign-on, library integration, teams of up to 200 seats, and discounts for students and US clinicians.
Where AgingResearch.News is different
- It works without a question: it reads each new aging paper as it appears and judges what the paper's own work shows about aging, so a senolytic trial filed under kidney disease still reaches you.
- The papers worth reading become short stories in plain words, each checked against its paper and naming its main limit.
- Each drug, gene and process has a page that shows where its evidence stands: which species, whether independent labs found the same, what points the other way, which trials posted no results, and who paid.
- Follows email you when a new paper lands on a drug, gene, author or search, and the Monday digest is written as an issue to read.
- Reading needs no account.
On AgingResearch.News now
On a typical day this past week, 4,300 new papers were read and 56 stories published, from a record of 707,854 papers.
- Blood test model may reduce Alzheimer’s brain-scan use
Study in people · Oct 20, 2026
- Cancer-promoting signals and immunity shape cell clearance in mice
Experiments in animals · Oct 20, 2026
- Face-photo predictions linked to mortality in cancer patients
Study in people · Oct 20, 2026
- Top
The day's most significant aging research, as stories
- Ask AgingResearch.News
Questions answered from the papers, every claim cited
- Rapamycin
An evidence page: species, independent labs, findings against, trials
- Trials
Clinical trials judged for what they mean for aging
- In your AI assistant
AgingResearch.News inside ChatGPT, Claude and others
- Data API
Papers, stories, entities and trials for your own tools
Sources
Every fact about Consensus above is from its own pages, read on the date given.
- 1. Consensus: About us, read Oct 20, 2026
- 2. Consensus: Pricing, read Oct 20, 2026
- 3. Consensus: Teams and Enterprise pricing, read Oct 20, 2026
- 4. Consensus: MCP, read Oct 20, 2026