3 ms·
No. This whole "aging is the result of loss of something" idea is outdated. The sooner we forget it, the better. Aging is simply the continuation of the develo
by grishka 4y ago
No. This whole "aging is the result of loss of something" idea is outdated. The sooner we forget it, the better.
Aging is simply the continuation of the development process that starts with conception. It also has to be coordinated across the entire organism somehow so that all tissues and organs age at the same rate, like they do in reality. "There's something in the bloodstream that tells the organism how old it is so it could then act its age" the only plausible explanation for the results of heterochronic parabiosis and other related experiments.
- oneoff786 4y ago> It also has to be coordinated across the entire organism somehow so that all tissues and organs age at the same rate, like they do in reality How could you possibly justify this claim?
- jacobsimon 4y agoI find this theory really interesting, and the fact that it is possible to reverse the epigenetic aging process to the unknown “backup” described in the article would support a mechanism that is coordinated like this rather than random. But it’s possible that the changes are indeed random or probabilistic and that they simply build on each other over time in a way that merely resembles coordinated aging.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> No. This whole "aging is the result of loss of something" idea is outdated. The sooner we forget it, the better. This oversimplifies the research. There is strong evidence for programmed death. That doesn't mean there isn't also damage accumulation.
- narrator 4y agoThe superchiasmatic nucleus is probably where the clock that regulates aging is. It's also the clock for everything else in the body though. Just got to tweak that, but maybe that will screw up our feelings of time passing and probably a whole lot of other stuff.