Punching the timeclock of life

Judge, I looked at one of the links that you provided in your first post. This is what it said: To me this suggests that if survival is planned, WHO plans it? We can even hear the voice of God without picking up a Bible! Impressive, but would you not agree, Willowtree, that we best not trust another to interpret our scriptural understanding.

Yes, but not all of it is so hard that someone else must be relied on in totality. With a modest education in a broad range of topics it is at least possible to make an educated judgement as to the validity of the experts pronouncements.It very often requies an explanation by the experts but from that an educated layperson may make thier own judgments.It is, however, not easy. Sometimes not easy at all. But you know what 'they' say: "Tough, deal with it".

Hi Phatboy ! This is all off-topic but if want to take me on concerning your blue box quote I will systematically destroy your position.You are advocating what is known as gnosticism - the heresy which almost conquered the Church after the apostles died.Either create a topic or let it go. Nice to hear from you Phatboy.WT

Does anyone think that each of us has an internal mechanism for a preordained death? In other words, is our lifespan basically unalterable or can we drink lots of antioxidants, exercise, eat right, and live beyond the genetic programming?This message has been edited by Phatboy, 10-13-2004 05:02 AM

quote:

---

Does anyone think that each of us has an internal mechanism for a preordained death?

---

There is strong evidence against this from some simple experiments which I will mention below.

quote:

---

In other words, is our lifespan basically unalterable or can we drink lots of antioxidants, exercise, eat right, and live beyond the genetic programming?

---

excercise, antioxidants, eating right are actually not the best way to extend ones life. Calorie restriction is a nearly universal way for mulitcellular organisms to lengthen life on average by 30%. When you calory restrict worms, rats, etc. (and I mean restrict to a level where you are constantly almost starving) life expectancy increases dramatically.Here is a review article (abstract included):
Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Sep;78(3):361-9. Related Articles, LinksCalorie restriction and aging: review of the literature and implications for studies in humans.Heilbronn LK, Ravussin E.Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70808, USA.Calorie restriction (CR) extends life span and retards age-related chronic diseases in a variety of species, including rats, mice, fish, flies, worms, and yeast. The mechanism or mechanisms through which this occurs are unclear. CR reduces metabolic rate and oxidative stress, improves insulin sensitivity, and alters neuroendocrine and sympathetic nervous system function in animals. Whether prolonged CR increases life span (or improves biomarkers of aging) in humans is unknown. In experiments of nature, humans have been subjected to periods of nonvolitional partial starvation. However, the diets in almost all of these cases have been of poor quality. The absence of adequate information on the effects of good-quality, calorie-restricted diets in nonobese humans reflects the difficulties involved in conducting long-term studies in an environment so conducive to overfeeding. Such studies in free-living persons also raise ethical and methodologic issues. Future studies in nonobese humans should focus on the effects of prolonged CR on metabolic rate, on neuroendocrine adaptations, on diverse biomarkers of aging, and on predictors of chronic age-related diseases.On the one hand, longer life would be cool...but perpetual starvation would certainly lower the quality of life for most people...unless you live somewhere where the food really sucks

I think that really depends on how you define 'best' - personally I'd say the best way to extend life has to maintain quality of life. There's no point living longer if you're just going to be a vegetable.Exercise has (IIRC) been shown to reduce, or delay, the onset of senility and maintain mental health and vigour into old age. Eating right (which is included in calorific restricution anyway) also helps maintain mental and physical health and has a rapidly noticable effect on quality of life.Going back to the original question however, I'd argue proper exercise and diet can only ever allow you to reach your genetic potential, not exceed it.

I don't see there being a genetic potential or program for aging. The effects of aging are a result of the development process and in particular, sexual development. The role of testosterone in lowering life expentancy is one example where eunics have the same life expectancy as women on average. Ablation of the sex cells in C.elegans also lengthens their lifespan. Natural selection selects for those who produce the most offspring and not those who stick around long past their sexual prime. I think healthy diet, excerise etc. is associated with longer lifespan because it works against the accumulation of products (like oxygen radicals) that cause deterioration in the first place. But this is environmental influence not a genetic program. The closest thing to a "program" if you will is that fibroblasts in cell culture will divide for somewhere in the range of 60 passages (meaning they fill the plate and you have to dilute them down again to fill the plate with cells). at that point, if fed, they do not die! They continue to live but just stop dividing...something is a limiting factor in this case. Of course, this is not so easy to measure in vivo.As to the best way, I agree that the quality of life would suck under a calorie restriction regime. (You would not be able to drink your home brewed beer )But you would have a chance at a much longer life. I was not trying to state that it was a great way to live but that it is the best method for living longer.

Indeed so. However, are these processes not effected by genetics? I was using the term 'genetic potential' not to imply a predetermined 'program for aging' but rather the effects of genetics on the processes that produce aging. And what kind of life would that be?!

quote:

---

Indeed so. However, are these processes not effected by genetics? I was using the term 'genetic potential' not to imply a predetermined 'program for aging' but rather the effects of genetics on the processes that produce aging.

---

I think there are two issues you bring up. First, development is very strongly affected by environment. While the developmental pathways are genetically controlled, they follow stochastically variable trajectories (with the most extreme being complete failure to develop). The second issue, I prefer to think of development as a process in itself with the "goal" if you will of producing an individual that can reproduce. Aging is an unintended consequence of the process. I don't want Phatboy to get the impression that you are born with a genetic sequence that tells you when you will die...but you are born with sequences that allow you to develop and have an influence on your lifespan.

quote:

---

And what kind of life would that be?!

---

You will have to update your home brewing thread...last time you posted, you said your beer tasted funky

I agree completely with what you said. Done.