Mokebe890 t1_j3ljr6b wrote
Reply to comment by a4mula in Arguments against calling aging a disease make no sense relative to other natural processes we attempt to fix. by Desperate_Food7354
None died of old age.
Old age is status of wear of biological systems in bodies. But it is because of biological organisms being programmed to produce offsprings and then die, just because their bodies are not made to live for X time. It is not passing chronological time, but internal damage that occurs over time.
My point is that aging is a word for disease that occurs over time. Maybe state organism is could be better, but anyway it is point in which organism starts to degredate. So it is condition that is really unwanted for consciouss being and should be treated like any other disease we are treating today.
But if you want me to show you organism that died of old age then none did, as I said.
a4mula t1_j3lk82h wrote
>organisms being programmed to produce offsprings and then die
That's not true. There are many living creatures, including mammals that suffer no age-related death at all.
>My point is that aging is a word for disease that occurs over time
And my point is that you're talking about symptoms, instead of diseases and it's not even a good definition of the word to begin with.
Mokebe890 t1_j3lmm5t wrote
Sure, because its either biological immortality or reproducing, yet more choose to reproduce than to be immortal.
Symptoms that occur because biological capabilities of organisms are close to end not because 75 years passed. Youre not developing age related disease because x time passed but because something altered your biology into a point when organism cant sustain its wellbeing. Add to this degeneration overtime from the first part about producing offsprings and thats more fitting definition.
a4mula t1_j3ln1s6 wrote
We can talk about symptoms all day long. It's all we've been talking about, because it's all we can talk about.
It's got nothing to do with being close to the end. Naked Mole Rats age, they never get close to the end.
So why are they special? Are they immune to this age shit?
Nope. They still age.
Mokebe890 t1_j3lngak wrote
I know that research yet their DNA says otherwise, that they do age. And it is important to note that their mortality dont increase with age unlike most mammals.
I dont really know if this discusson is mostly semantics. By no mean I say we can stop aging, its against physic laws. But I say that we can cure aging in humans, even if that means we need to check in our doctor every year or five for treatment. But if you think I say we can defy laws of physic and stop passage of time in humans then absolutly not.
a4mula t1_j3lnt6i wrote
It is semantics.
But they're really fucking important ones.
Aging is not a disease. It's a natural process.
And to beat this horse a little more, it does matter. Because when you start saying things like age is a disease.
You fail to understand that you're not even talking about age for one.
After all, 80 year old healthy person, disease free.
15 year old going through puberty, disease free.
Both are experiencing aging. We all are after all. Not all of us have disease.
The only world in which it makes sense to say Aging is a Disease.
Is one in which you're confused about words. And that means you're confused about the concepts behind those words. And that you'll be confused when searching for really fucking important things. Like how to actually cure a disease.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments