> On the same line of reasoning -- and I think I've posted a message about
> this before --, I'm still to ear a good explanation to the animal cloning
> experiments on the basis of the DNA damage theory of aging (I actually
> asked a few scientists working on the subject last month in Spa's Congress
> but I didn't get any attractive answer).
Maybe it is the reason so many hundreds of attempts are needed before
a success. You have to get lucky to find a cell without too much damage.
> As for mitotic misregulation as the basis of aging, that's a speculatory
> conclusion. You can always argue that some upstream mechanism is regulating
> the genetic machinery and creating the mitotic imbalances.
Yes, every few months someone notices that old cells are worse in terms
of characteristic X than young cells, and immediately proposes this as
a basis for aging. Correlation is not causation.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:14 MDT