From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Tue Dec 24 2002 - 20:18:09 MST
On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Healing power in a gene
>
> University of Illinois at Chicago researcher Robert
> Costa believes he knows why: our FoxM1B gene retires.
>
> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-12/uoia-hpi122402.php
Ok, I've read it and I'm not buying it. It sounds like hype to me.
"Like a traffic cop, FoxM1B controls both steps, Costa says.
'If the cells had no FoxM1B gene," he said, "their DNA often failed to make
a copy of itself, and they had trouble dividing.'"
"The DNA failed to duplicate due to a pileup of a protein called p21Cip1."
DUH, if cells fail to divide you are, of course, going to have problems
with numerous body functions (your immune system, your skin and digestive
tract, your lungs, repairing wounds, etc.) Any external or internal
organ system that is "exposed" to the environment plus your immune
system and perhaps your endothelial system (blood vessel linings)
depends on cell division to renew itself. However, it is important
to keep in mind with respect to "aging" that most other organs (e.g.
heart, kidney, brain are much less dependent on dividing cells).
Now, I'm not sure about p21Cip1, but normal p21 is a close relative of p53
and both of which are involved in the process of determining whether a
cell is "good to go" (with respect to division or perhaps if there is
too much damage which then induces them to commit apoptosis). [Genes are
now coming in "families" so it isn't clear to me without spending more
time whether p21Cip1 is indeed one and the same as the gene normally
identified as "p21". But usually the functions of genes within a "family"
are similar.]
So it sounds to me like they are simply saying, if cells don't divide
you age. Well my response to that is "Not so fast buddy". This is
a perspective promoted in "Reversing Human Aging" by Michael Fossel.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0688143245
I know Michael and am comfortable to say in public or to him personally
that this is an incomplete perspective. I believe he is currently
working on a textbook that may be somewhat more refined. Michael
is currently the editor of the Journal of Anti-Aging Medicine
(http://www.liebertpub.com/JAA/default1.asp) and one of the co-directors
of the American Aging Association.
So it sounds to me like Robert Costa read "Reversing Human Aging"
and then made some invalid leaps with respect to the genes he was
working on. Bad, bad, bad science. There are probably dozens,
if not hundreds, of genes that can impact the ability of cells to divide
and they are all going to cause *some* of the features of "aging"
if the limit cell division.
Why is this? Simply because to prevent cancer the amount/rate of
cell division must be limited. Limit the amount of cell division and
you limit the ability of a whole set of organs to renew themselves.
But that is *not* a complete picture with respect to what "aging" is.
It doesn't touch the question of how do you renew the organs that do
*not* depend on cellular division for renewal?
Sorry to rain on your parade Jeff but I think you are being dragged
over a popular cliff (isn't this a scene from an Indiana Jones movie?)
and I'd like to hold onto your feet to save you if possible.
Best,
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:53 MST