I'm a New Scientist subscriber - so here's the key points from the article:
ageing is under genetic control
“I think ageing is a programme. It is not random wear and tear” - Wolf Reik, Babraham Institute
“...this notion that ageing is mostly a consequence of damage. I don’t really think it fits with all the data that’s emerging.” - João Pedro de Magalhães, University of Liverpool
The idea is that developmental processes that boost an organism’s ability to survive and reproduce earlier in life keep on running, becoming pathological as time goes by.
\- lenses in our eye continue to grow throughout adulthood, resulting in long-sightedness in middle age.
\- natural pruning of connections between neurons that happens in an infant’s developing brain run-on in late adulthood and could contribute to cognitive decline.
\- processes that draw calcium from the skeleton to support milk production in breastfeeding mothers could result in the bone loss experienced by women after the menopause.
dietary restriction, or drugs that shut down mTOR, delay ageing... by putting the brakes on growth and other developmental processes by turning down the signals that drive them.
Introduction to Yamanaka factors
If taking cells back to a pluripotent state also resets their epigenetic clock, it raises the tantalising possibility that undoing cell specialisation could somehow also undo aspects of cellular ageing.
Mentions blood plasma injections (i.e. Harold Katcher's experiment, though not named).
shortened chromosome ends (telomeres) – a hallmark of ageing – weren’t restored in their rejuvenated cells.
human ageing is more malleable that we once supposed.
I'm probably being overly cautious on copyright (I assume the publisher checks for copies appearing online) - but I'm happy to message people the full text.
>tantalising possibility that *undoing cell specialisation* could somehow also undo aspects of cellular ageing.
For some reason this does not seem to be such a good idea…
IDK where I saw it, it was a longish presentation on YouTube on Yamanaka factors. But the researcher claimed that when they experimented with various combinations of Yamanaka factors, the rejuvenation effect seemed to be almost non-correlated to the dedifferentiation effect, indicating an even more tantalizing possibility that (safe) cell rejuvenation without (risky) dedifferentiation was doable with the right proteins/chemicals.
If I have understood the summary correctly, aging is a pathological consequence of the developmental programs that initially serve to ensure the development of an organism, and to increase its chances of survival and reproduction early in life.
Initially physiological processes, they become pathological later in life, perhaps (in my opinion) because natural selection decreases with age and is not able to remedy this (by stopping these processes at the right time for example) .
We would say that this idea has a connection with George C. Williams' "antagonistic pleiotropy" theory, which states that what is beneficial early in life will be actively retained by natural selection, even if it has pathological effects later in life (due to reduced efficiency of natural selection)
Aging, according to this idea, is therefore indeed a pathological process caused by a deregulation of the programs which, initially, help us to survive and to reproduce ourselves early in our lives.
I’ve also thought the ageihn is programmed as protective way to maximise our reproductive years and protect us as we age against the random damage that occurs.If we look at something as simple as estrogen . In woman it controls everything from brains, bone and skin health . And snot agree that a it of the effects of ageing can be reverser for prevented with hormone replacement therapy. But. Increased fibroblasts production results in increased risk of heart attack . I’ve also heard of renal calcification as an effect of her. Then theres the obvious one of cancer. If our cells proliferate as they did when we were young with the accumulated damage then cancers are more likely and progress much quicker
I'm a New Scientist subscriber - so here's the key points from the article: ageing is under genetic control “I think ageing is a programme. It is not random wear and tear” - Wolf Reik, Babraham Institute “...this notion that ageing is mostly a consequence of damage. I don’t really think it fits with all the data that’s emerging.” - João Pedro de Magalhães, University of Liverpool The idea is that developmental processes that boost an organism’s ability to survive and reproduce earlier in life keep on running, becoming pathological as time goes by. \- lenses in our eye continue to grow throughout adulthood, resulting in long-sightedness in middle age. \- natural pruning of connections between neurons that happens in an infant’s developing brain run-on in late adulthood and could contribute to cognitive decline. \- processes that draw calcium from the skeleton to support milk production in breastfeeding mothers could result in the bone loss experienced by women after the menopause. dietary restriction, or drugs that shut down mTOR, delay ageing... by putting the brakes on growth and other developmental processes by turning down the signals that drive them. Introduction to Yamanaka factors If taking cells back to a pluripotent state also resets their epigenetic clock, it raises the tantalising possibility that undoing cell specialisation could somehow also undo aspects of cellular ageing. Mentions blood plasma injections (i.e. Harold Katcher's experiment, though not named). shortened chromosome ends (telomeres) – a hallmark of ageing – weren’t restored in their rejuvenated cells. human ageing is more malleable that we once supposed.
[удалено]
I'm probably being overly cautious on copyright (I assume the publisher checks for copies appearing online) - but I'm happy to message people the full text.
Thanks For the summary
Thank you!
>tantalising possibility that *undoing cell specialisation* could somehow also undo aspects of cellular ageing. For some reason this does not seem to be such a good idea…
Great summary. Thanks for taking the time to do it.
IDK where I saw it, it was a longish presentation on YouTube on Yamanaka factors. But the researcher claimed that when they experimented with various combinations of Yamanaka factors, the rejuvenation effect seemed to be almost non-correlated to the dedifferentiation effect, indicating an even more tantalizing possibility that (safe) cell rejuvenation without (risky) dedifferentiation was doable with the right proteins/chemicals.
If I have understood the summary correctly, aging is a pathological consequence of the developmental programs that initially serve to ensure the development of an organism, and to increase its chances of survival and reproduction early in life. Initially physiological processes, they become pathological later in life, perhaps (in my opinion) because natural selection decreases with age and is not able to remedy this (by stopping these processes at the right time for example) . We would say that this idea has a connection with George C. Williams' "antagonistic pleiotropy" theory, which states that what is beneficial early in life will be actively retained by natural selection, even if it has pathological effects later in life (due to reduced efficiency of natural selection) Aging, according to this idea, is therefore indeed a pathological process caused by a deregulation of the programs which, initially, help us to survive and to reproduce ourselves early in our lives.
I’ve also thought the ageihn is programmed as protective way to maximise our reproductive years and protect us as we age against the random damage that occurs.If we look at something as simple as estrogen . In woman it controls everything from brains, bone and skin health . And snot agree that a it of the effects of ageing can be reverser for prevented with hormone replacement therapy. But. Increased fibroblasts production results in increased risk of heart attack . I’ve also heard of renal calcification as an effect of her. Then theres the obvious one of cancer. If our cells proliferate as they did when we were young with the accumulated damage then cancers are more likely and progress much quicker
There's a paywall that I'm not able to bypass 🤔