From: Reason (reason@exratio.com)
Date: Thu Dec 05 2002 - 21:46:18 MST
---> Joao Magalhaes
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-extropians@extropy.org
> aging, the way I see it, aging is programmed into the genes--how else can
> we explain the 25-fold difference in rate of aging between mice and
> humans?--and a few key regulatory genes control the rate of aging in
> mammals. Now, the question is: which genes? I don't know. That's what we
> must find out, but my money is on the DNA repair/transcription
> complex and
> the changes in chromatin structure that involve proteins such as
> the Werner protein, Ku, the telomeres, etc.
Just to be contrarian, how about aging being a function of damage due to
rate of energy processing? That doesn't have to be particularly genetic. I
seem to recall that most mammals go through the same number of heartbeats in
a lifetime (ballpark) irrespective of size. So you could do some math based
on scaled energy costs of circulatory systems per cell in the body, and you
could find that mouse/human is 25/1. Or more probably not, but I just wanted
to point out that biochemical/biomechanical stuff based on simple physical
laws relating to size and volume could be just as important.
(And someone here could no doubt point interested parties to scientific
papers showing just that, but I'm pushing my non-work time allowance just by
scribing this short e-mail :)
Reason
http://www.exratio.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:35 MST