哺乳动物衰老:主动和被动机制及其医学意义

Theodore C. Goldsmith
{"title":"哺乳动物衰老:主动和被动机制及其医学意义","authors":"Theodore C. Goldsmith","doi":"10.1016/j.bihy.2008.12.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article compares two hypotheses regarding the mechanisms responsible for aging in humans and other mammals. In the <em>passive</em> mechanism, aging is the result of inadequacies in maintenance and repair functions that act to prevent or repair damage from fundamental deteriorative processes. In the <em>active</em> mechanism, a life span management system purposely limits life span by deactivating maintenance and repair processes beyond a species-specific age.</p><p>As described here, the active mechanism provides a much better fit to observational evidence while the passive mechanism provides a much better fit to traditional evolutionary mechanics theory. However, there are many other observations that conflict with traditional theory and consequently a number of alternative evolutionary mechanics theories have been developed since 1962. Several of these alternatives support active life span management and aging theories providing a rationale for active life span management have been developed based on each of those alternatives.</p><p>This issue is very important to our ability to treat age-related diseases and conditions. If indeed the passive mechanism is correct, then efforts should continue to be exerted to find treatments for each different manifestation of aging, independently of the others. If the active concept is valid it is clear that there are, in addition, substantial opportunities for finding agents that generally delay aging and simultaneously ameliorate multiple manifestations of aging.</p><p>In the past, the evolutionary issues have been used as essentially the entire justification for summarily rejecting active theories. Given the public health considerations and the increasing number of issues surrounding evolutionary mechanics theory, this is no longer a reasonable or responsible path.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":87894,"journal":{"name":"Bioscience hypotheses","volume":"2 2","pages":"Pages 59-64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bihy.2008.12.002","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mammal aging: Active and passive mechanisms and their medical implications\",\"authors\":\"Theodore C. Goldsmith\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bihy.2008.12.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This article compares two hypotheses regarding the mechanisms responsible for aging in humans and other mammals. In the <em>passive</em> mechanism, aging is the result of inadequacies in maintenance and repair functions that act to prevent or repair damage from fundamental deteriorative processes. In the <em>active</em> mechanism, a life span management system purposely limits life span by deactivating maintenance and repair processes beyond a species-specific age.</p><p>As described here, the active mechanism provides a much better fit to observational evidence while the passive mechanism provides a much better fit to traditional evolutionary mechanics theory. However, there are many other observations that conflict with traditional theory and consequently a number of alternative evolutionary mechanics theories have been developed since 1962. Several of these alternatives support active life span management and aging theories providing a rationale for active life span management have been developed based on each of those alternatives.</p><p>This issue is very important to our ability to treat age-related diseases and conditions. If indeed the passive mechanism is correct, then efforts should continue to be exerted to find treatments for each different manifestation of aging, independently of the others. If the active concept is valid it is clear that there are, in addition, substantial opportunities for finding agents that generally delay aging and simultaneously ameliorate multiple manifestations of aging.</p><p>In the past, the evolutionary issues have been used as essentially the entire justification for summarily rejecting active theories. Given the public health considerations and the increasing number of issues surrounding evolutionary mechanics theory, this is no longer a reasonable or responsible path.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioscience hypotheses\",\"volume\":\"2 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 59-64\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bihy.2008.12.002\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioscience hypotheses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175623920900007X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioscience hypotheses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175623920900007X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

这篇文章比较了关于人类和其他哺乳动物衰老机制的两种假设。在被动机制中,老化是维护和修复功能不足的结果,这些功能可以防止或修复基本恶化过程造成的损伤。在主动机制中,寿命管理系统通过使维持和修复过程失效而有意地限制了物种特定年龄之后的寿命。如本文所述,主动机制更符合观测证据,而被动机制更符合传统的进化力学理论。然而,有许多其他的观察结果与传统理论相冲突,因此自1962年以来发展了许多替代的进化力学理论。这些替代方案中的一些支持积极寿命管理和老龄化理论,提供了基于这些替代方案的积极寿命管理的基本原理。这个问题对我们治疗与年龄有关的疾病和状况的能力非常重要。如果这种被动机制确实是正确的,那么就应该继续努力,为每一种不同的衰老表现寻找治疗方法,而不是其他的。如果主动概念是有效的,那么很明显,还有大量的机会可以找到通常延缓衰老并同时改善多种衰老表现的药物。在过去,进化论的问题基本上被用来作为简单地拒绝现行理论的全部理由。考虑到公共卫生方面的考虑以及围绕进化力学理论的越来越多的问题,这不再是一条合理或负责任的道路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mammal aging: Active and passive mechanisms and their medical implications

This article compares two hypotheses regarding the mechanisms responsible for aging in humans and other mammals. In the passive mechanism, aging is the result of inadequacies in maintenance and repair functions that act to prevent or repair damage from fundamental deteriorative processes. In the active mechanism, a life span management system purposely limits life span by deactivating maintenance and repair processes beyond a species-specific age.

As described here, the active mechanism provides a much better fit to observational evidence while the passive mechanism provides a much better fit to traditional evolutionary mechanics theory. However, there are many other observations that conflict with traditional theory and consequently a number of alternative evolutionary mechanics theories have been developed since 1962. Several of these alternatives support active life span management and aging theories providing a rationale for active life span management have been developed based on each of those alternatives.

This issue is very important to our ability to treat age-related diseases and conditions. If indeed the passive mechanism is correct, then efforts should continue to be exerted to find treatments for each different manifestation of aging, independently of the others. If the active concept is valid it is clear that there are, in addition, substantial opportunities for finding agents that generally delay aging and simultaneously ameliorate multiple manifestations of aging.

In the past, the evolutionary issues have been used as essentially the entire justification for summarily rejecting active theories. Given the public health considerations and the increasing number of issues surrounding evolutionary mechanics theory, this is no longer a reasonable or responsible path.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信