thescientist | The concept of aging is undergoing a
rapid transformation in medicine. The question has long been asked: Is
aging a natural process that should be accepted as inevitable, or is it
pathologic, a disease that should be prevented and treated? For the vast
majority of medicine’s history, the former position was considered a
self-evident truth. So futile was any attempt to resist the ravages of
aging that the matter was relegated to works of fantasy and fiction. But
today, the biomedical community is rethinking its answer to this
question.
The controversy has been fanned, to a great extent, by one Aubrey
de?Grey, a Cambridge University–trained computer scientist and a
self-taught biologist and gerontologist. Over the past decade, de Grey
has undertaken an energetic campaign to reframe aging as a pathologic
process, one that merits the same level of attention as, say, cancer or
diabetes. Although many of de Grey’s claims remain
controversial—notably, that the first person who will live to 1,000
years old is already among us—I agree that we can and should pathologize
aging. In fact, it seems we already have.
“Aging” is a term we use to describe the changes our bodies undergo
over time. Colloquially, we tend to refer to early changes, say from
infancy to early adulthood, as maturation or development and reserve
“aging” for changes that occur thereafter. The early changes are
generally considered good: stronger muscles, wiser minds, and so on. The
later changes are far less popular: thinning skin and hair, weakening
bones, and other forms of decline.
0 comments:
Post a Comment