From: Eugene Leitl (eugene@liposome.genebee.msu.su)
Date: Fri Jan 16 1998 - 12:43:07 MST
On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, CurtAdams wrote:
> [...]
> Yes, but my point, in some post, was that whole-body levels of
> telomerase are probably already close to optimal. If the gains
> from increasing telomerase exceeded the risks, evolution would
> already have cranked it up. In order to get big gains from
Not necessarily so, for the timescales available for the darwinian
optimization seem to be be smaller than the demand invoked by the
(evolutionary) quite recent memetic takeover. No refs whatsoever, of
course. (Otoh other suspectedly antigeriatric shenanigans as glutathione
level in serum which is close at the biological tolerance threshold seem
to prove otherwise, so nyanya).
> toying with telomerase, we will probably have to use it with more
> precision than evolution can usually manage.
What amazes me most, that everyone (me included) seems to be knowing
everything about evolution, even arcane agendas inclusive. This seems
strange, for so far I've missed the daily fitness function synoptics
update in the news.
> [...]
'gene
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:28 MST