4 ms·

> Is Aging a disease No, it is not.

echelon 7y ago
> No, it is not. What would you call Progeria? What about cancer? Transition of a cell into a particularly nasty disease state. (That term, by the way, is one the biologists throw around quite a bit to describe broken or damaged cells that no longer function as intended.) What if senescence can be slowed or stopped? What then? Diseases need not be communicable.
- lm28469 7y ago
  > What would you call Progeria? > Progeria is an extremely rare autosomal dominant genetic disorder in which symptoms ___resembling___ aspects of aging are manifested at a very early age. > What about cancer? Cancer is cancer, aging is aging.
  - echelon 7y ago
    Aging is a slide into disease state. A non-healthy or misbehaving cell is in a disease state. Accumulation of intracellular and extracellular garbage, DNA point mutations, transpositions, malfunction of the cell cycle, abnormal signalling, and a myriad of other break downs are disease state. Cells are machines and they function in predictable biomechanical and biochemical manners. Aging related disease state encompasses some population of the space of deleterious state change. In the micro, aging is a disease just like any other. It is the layperson understanding of the word "disease" that does not fit.
    - speedplane 7y ago
      > In the micro, aging is a disease just like any other. The difference is that the word "disease" is something that at least theoretically can be cured. Aging does not have that implication. It follows then that if you say "Aging is a Disease", you're effectively saying that immortality is theoretically achievable. That's what makes the claim so uncomfortable.
      - echelon 7y ago
        > The difference is that the word "disease" is something that at least theoretically can be cured. Nowhere does the definition of disease imply that. There are many diseases today that are patently incurable. Aging, like cancer, is multifaceted. There are many low hanging fruit that we can begin to tackle now. > you're effectively saying that immortality is theoretically achievable. I'm not saying anything about immortality. But I don't see how a 100, 120 year average lifespan with expanded quality of life isn't achievable.
- AllegedAlec 7y ago
  Anything which has been part of our genetic make-up for more than a few million years of evolutionary history can no longer be considered a disease. See also: our inability to synthesise some vitamins, our (more or less) unmovable ears, and how we can no longer asexually reproduce.

> No, it is not. What would you call Progeria? What about cancer? Transition of a cell into a particularly nasty disease state. (That term, by the way, is one the biologists throw around quite a bit to describe broken or damaged cells that no longer function as intended.) What if senescence can be slowed or stopped? What then? Diseases need not be communicable.

lm28469 7y ago
> What would you call Progeria? > Progeria is an extremely rare autosomal dominant genetic disorder in which symptoms ___resembling___ aspects of aging are manifested at a very early age. > What about cancer? Cancer is cancer, aging is aging.
- echelon 7y ago
  Aging is a slide into disease state. A non-healthy or misbehaving cell is in a disease state. Accumulation of intracellular and extracellular garbage, DNA point mutations, transpositions, malfunction of the cell cycle, abnormal signalling, and a myriad of other break downs are disease state. Cells are machines and they function in predictable biomechanical and biochemical manners. Aging related disease state encompasses some population of the space of deleterious state change. In the micro, aging is a disease just like any other. It is the layperson understanding of the word "disease" that does not fit.
  - speedplane 7y ago
    > In the micro, aging is a disease just like any other. The difference is that the word "disease" is something that at least theoretically can be cured. Aging does not have that implication. It follows then that if you say "Aging is a Disease", you're effectively saying that immortality is theoretically achievable. That's what makes the claim so uncomfortable.
    - echelon 7y ago
      > The difference is that the word "disease" is something that at least theoretically can be cured. Nowhere does the definition of disease imply that. There are many diseases today that are patently incurable. Aging, like cancer, is multifaceted. There are many low hanging fruit that we can begin to tackle now. > you're effectively saying that immortality is theoretically achievable. I'm not saying anything about immortality. But I don't see how a 100, 120 year average lifespan with expanded quality of life isn't achievable.
AllegedAlec 7y ago
Anything which has been part of our genetic make-up for more than a few million years of evolutionary history can no longer be considered a disease. See also: our inability to synthesise some vitamins, our (more or less) unmovable ears, and how we can no longer asexually reproduce.