Re: "Immortality" gene revealed

Joao Pedro (
Sun, 04 Jan 1998 23:51:51 -0800


I wrote and Anders Sandberg asked:
> > True, around 175 divisions when compared to 50-60 divisions in our case.
> What is the source of this? It sounds interesting.

Hayflick's "How and Why We Age" pages 132/133.

CurtAdams wrote:
> It's my understanding that many of these species (the lobsters in
> particular) have since been shown to age, and the current theory
> holds that every animal ages if it lives long enough. A long
> while back people thought that growth cessation was a necessary
> part of aging and hence animals that keep growing (fish, lobsters)
> didn't age.

That's why biogerontologists call them species that appear not to age.
As far as I know, no-one has ever proved that lobsters age. If you know
of anyone, please let me know.

Also, species that appear not to age do grow indefinitely. I don't know
if there is any species that grows indefinitely and does age, but I know
that all species that appear not to age grow indefinitely. Hayflick

"Animals that reach a fixed size as adults -- ... -- do age"

See ya,

         Hasta la vista...

"Life's too short to cry, long enough to try." - Kai Hansen Reason's Triumph at: