Re: Aging: don't go there [was: manganese SOD and CR]

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Mon Apr 07 2003 - 08:44:47 MDT

  • Next message: Robert J. Bradbury: "Re: Changing ones mind"

    On Sun, 6 Apr 2003, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

    > ### I keep debating the related problem of mitochondrial mutations in PD
    > about once a day with my boss and other people, and I can only concur - we
    > know little, the system is complex, methods crude.

    Rafal, could you explain "PD"?

    > I started recently working with a laser capture microscope and we have
    > some ideas about how to nail the mutations, which we know simply *must*
    > be there, but haven't been found, despite dozens of people working on it.

    I wouldn't say they haven't been found -- but would agree that they
    haven't been found in the quantities one would expect for increased
    free radical production to be considered a major cause of aging.

    *BUT* if one has a cascade effect -- increased mitochondrial FR
    production leading to increased double strand breaks (in the nucleus)
    that trigger apoptosis -- *then* you have a real scientific problem --
    "*How* do you find something that "disappears" almost as fast as it is
    produced?" [In this case aging is a very gradual process because you
    are losing cells that are only being replaced to a limited extent
    by circulating stem cells -- which may themselves be a declining
    population.]

    > Give us a couple million $ and an extra sequencer or two, and we'll get
    > them. Guaranteed.

    I don't think so if the above scenario I've outlined is the case.
    Rafal -- seriously -- do some thinking about cascade effects.
    I've got a fairly robust theory of aging that I call the "energy
    catastrophe theory of aging" involving the improper repair of
    double strand breaks causing increased production of proteins
    that will not fold properly whose production and breakdown
    produces increased demands on energy production, free radicals
    from which in turn produce even more double strand breaks.

    If this is correct then one has the problem of looking for
    something that simply isn't going to be there!

    It requires some much more complex methods such as measuring
    the percentage of proteins that are produced and will not
    fold correctly and must therefore be broken down -- plus
    some assessment of the rates of apoptosis -- plus some
    analysis of the rates of the production of new mitochondria
    (due to increased energy demands).

    As I said -- it is *not* an easy problem.

    (If you email me offlist, I've got a very rough draft of notes
    and references on this that you may want to review.)

    Robert



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 07 2003 - 08:51:44 MDT