3 ms·
If I'm reading this correctly, the only "food" involved is cannibalism, although they didn't end up doing so with the mice due to supply issues. It doesn't expl
by svachalek 10y ago
If I'm reading this correctly, the only "food" involved is cannibalism, although they didn't end up doing so with the mice due to supply issues. It doesn't explain why eating another organism's "accumulated damage" reduces the eater's own lifespan but says they expected it to have even more effect than it did.
Clearly, eating works differently than I thought it did, because I'm at a complete loss.
- imode 10y agothe mice ate deer meat, I wouldn't call that "cannibalism". the fruit flies and the yeast, though, I would.
- jxcole 10y agoNot really a specialist or anything, but I surmised that aging creates what you could call "bad chemicals" in your body. > unavoidable byproducts of enzyme function, for example, or of protein-to-protein interactions, errors in DNA transcription or translation. One would surmise that aging adds "bad chemicals" to your body at some set rate. If you ALSO eat old things, that are already full of these "bad chemicals", your body will acquire these bad chemicals faster (because of the extra source). In short, this research shows that there is some byproduct of the aging process that can be transferred from one organism to another and cause aging in the second organism.
- mjevans 10y agoAgeing and death are the accumulation of errors; is my take from this study.
- vectorjohn 10y agoHow is that your take? It seems that would completely contradict it. If it's just accumulation of errors how would that be impacted at all by what you eat? Especially the age of what you eat!
- mjevans 10y agoThink of errors as a toxin or heavy metal. Not all aging will be like that, time is merely correlated.
- M_Grey 10y agoI wonder what the role of prions would be in that? Assuming of course that this isn't just another bullshit, N=20 study.