Major Criticisms of The Telomeric Theory

Excelife excelife at earthlink.net
Tue Sep 15 01:25:00 EST 1998


In article <35FDCEAC.5AF4 at netcom.ca>, tmatth at netcom.ca says...
>
>> >> Yes, much research needs to be done here.  However, the evidence, of
>> >> telomeric involvement in transcriptional silencing
>> >
>> >Please explain precisely what you mean here and give examples of such
>> >evidence.
>> 
>> See my response to James where I provided the abstract on this phenomena 
>> in S. cerevisea, (Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997 Sep 2;94(18):9768-9772).
>
>Okay, I have reread that and now have it integrated into my limited
>little brain. Sorry, I was not at the right point in my
>thinking/learning to "take that in" before. However, my view of the
>abstract and its explanation is that while this lifespan extension in
>yeast does appear to relate to telomeres and their length, the
>relationship and the mechanism is so foreign and different (let alone
>opposite) from the effect of telomeres in cellular senescence and
>possibly in human aging, that it too is irrelevant to the Telomeric
>Theory of Aging which you have been attempting to "sell" to us. (sorry
>to phrase it that way, no smear or insult is intended).


This is very different from the telomeric theory of aging regarding 
replicating cells and their relation to human aging.  It is more an example 
of how telomeric length can influence and possibly control age related 
genetic expression.

The significance of this line of research is that it suggests the method by 
which maintaining telomeric length in human cells can allow for the 
expression of "phenotypically youthful" cells. 

 

>What you seem to totally ignore though is that there will have been an
>enormous waste of resources which *should* have been spent on other
>antiaging research, if you are wrong. *That* is the main reason that I
>said (given the condition that I made) that "I hope you are right"!
>*You* seems to have this mental vested interest in the correctness of
>the Telomeric Theory, whereas *I* simply wish to live forever :) and
>thus, want resources spent in the most efficient manner possible.
>"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" which antiaging theory is most
>important for saving my life. 


Except for Aubrey's research proposals on mutant mitochondria I haven't seen 
much suggestion for research that has the same potential for extending the 
human life span as the telomeric theory of aging.  On a cost vs benefit 
analysis there is no better investment than research into this theory.



Thomas Mahoney, Pres.
Lifeline Laboratories, Inc.
http://home.earthlink.net/~excelife/index.html





More information about the Ageing mailing list