In article <1793 at nih-csl.nih.gov>, sullivan at alw.nih.gov (Sullivan) writes...
>In article <176612 at tiger.oxy.edu>, hoopes at oxy.edu (Laura L. M. Hoopes) writes:
>|> Since the field of gerontology really lacks a consensus on this issue, I'll
>|> just give you my view and hope that others out there will post theirs. I
>|> view different ageing rates as differences in the protective/repair capaciti
>|> es of different organisms, as determined by their genetic capabilities. The
>|> process of ageing itself seems to me to be merely an expression of the secon
>|> d law of thermodynamics, but the defenses against this onslaught of the
>|> universe are tremendously variable between organisms. Because I am a molec
> One celled animals divide and I assume age (do they?). Obviously
> they do not (at least they all do not) or they'd die out
> as a species. Presumable, one celled animals have the same
> onslaughts as human cells face from the environment. Why, if
> one celled animals do not age, do human cells?
I think of it more as just a life-long sequence of changes,
"programmed" by both the DNA and by the other contents of
the egg (of the cell at division if uni-cellular). The
age "correcting" mechanisms involved in reproduction are
just another part of the sequence. Aging takes place in
humans on both a system (and organ) level and a cellular level.
Looking at it on only one or the other scale is insufficient.
John G. Otto
