Must an AGING PROCESS be universal? was Defining...

Steve Chambers steve at chambers.ak.planet.co.nz
Mon Mar 27 21:41:43 EST 1995


In <199503270809.SAA03440 at sol.ccs.deakin.edu.au> drierac at deakin.edu.au (Chris driver) writes:
>I like your analysis so far and agree with most of it. However if all 
>processes that are deteriorative apply only to some people, there should be 
>some people to whom none of the deteriorative processes apply..

>Your turn. Chris

That doesn't necessarily follow, especially if there were enough of 'em 
and they were all "common".  To illustrate the point let's assume there
are 100 aging processes (I believe there are more) and any human has a
30% chance of each.  Assuming random distribution the prob. of being subject 
to no process is 0.7^100 or one chance in around 30,000,000,000,000,000.
It's not going to happen very often.

The above dynamic may explain lifespan distribution, or it may not.  By 
saying that an aging process NEED not be universal I certainly don't mean
to imply that NO aging process is universal.

Many processes WILL be universal.  The second law of thermodynamics is
a powerful foe and few biological defences offer perfect protection.
DNA repair isn't perfect; free radical defences aren't either.  Some
such universal process (or combination thereof) MAY limit the life of 
the oldest old - or it may not.

Steve  

-- 
 ________________________ 
(I_lurk,_therefore_I_am!_\ ,,,                    Steve Chambers
                          (o o)   steve at chambers.ak.planet.co.nz
----------------------oOO--(_)--OOo-----------------------------
(c) Steve Chambers                     1995. All rights reserved 
----------------------------------------------------------------




More information about the Ageing mailing list