3 ms·
False all around. Aging is a result of evolutionary neglect, not evolutionary pressure. We haven't evolved to live longer because until extremely recent times
by dfranke 17y ago
False all around. Aging is a result of evolutionary neglect, not evolutionary pressure. We haven't evolved to live longer because until extremely recent times, only a negligible fraction of us lasted long enough for old age (or menopause) to become an issue. Furthermore, your argument about tarantulas rests on group selection, which is discredited.
- araneae 17y agoThat's a semantic argument. But what it means for aging is functionally the same; we're programmed to last a certain amount of time (when there is pressure) and when the pressure runs out... we break down. This is essentially the same as having a programmed break down time. Secondly, the argument on tarantulas does not rest on group selection at all. For any one male tarantula, he spreads his genes better by living 2 years than living 8. Long living male tarantulas don't do as well, presumably because of some trade-offs between reproduction and lifespan. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_history_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_history_theory
- Locke1689 17y agoSo what if there's pressure? You argue that we must rewrite the source code -- so? Genetics = source code. So rewrite the source code.
- MikeCapone 17y agoWe're too far away from understanding metabolism for that to be a realistic path to defeating aging in the near future. The engineering approach of periodical repair seems like the only game in town.