Science

[trolls' bane]

I read a very interesting article in Cosmos Magazine called "Unravelling the secret of ageing" (Issue 17, p. 74).

Just to give an idea of what it's about, I'll quote the headline of the article:
"More than 30 years after discovering an extraordinary enzyme that prevents the threads of our DNA from fraying, Elizabeth Blackburn is still straightening out the curly question of why our cells age."

Basically, at the tips of our chromosomes are long segments of DNA (telomeres) consisting of the same three base pairs repeated possibly fifty or more times across the segment, called telogenes. As the cell divides, one of these is lost. After subsequent divisions and subsequent losses, when the telogenes are used up, the cell-division loss moves on to the next thing along the chromosomes: our actual active genome. This eating away at our genes could possibly be the reason for which we age. The enzyme telomerase can restore the missing ends of the telomeres.


Some of you may recall that I mentioned another article on longevity in Scientific American. I'll revisit that issue and summarize it. The two articles represent two basic facets of genetic engineering or modification: the telomerase article would be more applicable as somatic gene modification (in other words, can be used and effects felt in vivo), and the other article on the SIRT4 gene family would be more likely categorized with germline gene modification (meaning, basically, a benign sort of eugenics).

[Nautipus]

We studied telomeres some in AP. it is an interesting proposition, but what about mechanical ageing? Can our tissues really withstand the weathering effects our environment, even now, still expends on us?

[trolls' bane]

Originally Posted by Nautipus

We studied telomeres some in AP. it is an interesting proposition, but what about mechanical ageing? Can our tissues really withstand the weathering effects our environment, even now, still expends on us?

I've not considered that aspect of it yet, but your having said it makes sense. (Thanks for pointing it out.) But I suppose the benefit of the second article I mentioned is that in later generations, with the sirtuin gene family multiplied several times beyond is natural occurrence (e.g. copies inserted into parents or single-celled embryo virally, perhaps) to favorable levels, along with its associates, could possibly have an effect in slowing mechanical aging. "Repair" genes, in other words, would need to be added to avoid mechanical aging.

Nothing lasts forever, though, so the effects of mechanical aging would be merely slowed down.

I'm not exactly sure what the processes are for gene copying, addition, and deletion are, so therefore I don't know the limitations yet. A gene's gotta know his limitations.

[Nautipus]

We studied that breifly too. The gene for for repairing the telomeres could make the telomeres too long, I'm not sure what that would do though. But yes, mechanical ageing would likely continue, with genetic ageing at a stand still. But those genes could malfunction and start a sequenceing gene, which could result in cell death, but that is just shallow speculation.

[trolls' bane]

Originally Posted by Nautipus

We studied that breifly too. The gene for for repairing the telomeres could make the telomeres too long, I'm not sure what that would do though. But yes, mechanical ageing would likely continue, with genetic ageing at a stand still. But those genes could malfunction and start a sequenceing gene, which could result in cell death, but that is just shallow speculation.

Hmm... I wonder if there's a way to "program" (molecularly) a suicide gene in malfunctioning cells...
Probably more room for error there than anywhere else.

[Nautipus]

There actually allready is a suicide gene in normal cells, that will activate if the cell begins behaving abnormally.

Here's a link. Jump around a little bit, there's information to be had. I'm tired, night.

Here's a nice video, too

[BeardofPants]

We don't need to organically live forever - the sooner we can download our consciousness into mechanoid or organic-mechanoid repositories, the better.

Here's some (imo) rather fascinating predictions by futurist, Raymond Kurzweil

[Nautipus]

First, we need to figure out what conciousness is, then what subconcious is, then find a way to equate that to known biological processes (along with finding out what memories are), then we will be on the right track.

[Tuinor]

Originally Posted by Nautipus

We studied that breifly too. The gene for for repairing the telomeres could make the telomeres too long, I'm not sure what that would do though. But yes, mechanical ageing would likely continue, with genetic ageing at a stand still. But those genes could malfunction and start a sequenceing gene, which could result in cell death, but that is just shallow speculation.

Well, we know that there is an enzyme that's supposed to make repairs to the genetic structure of a cell if it is damaged, as well as a terminator enzyme that destroys the cell when genetic damage is too great.

As for mechanical damage, that matters little as long as cellular reproduction is continued, because the continued reproduction of cells is what maintains "mechanical" stability. The way to fix mechanical damage would simply be initiating cell growth and division: a feat easily accomplished with portioned amounts of steriods.

[Nautipus]

Originally Posted by Tuinor

Well, we know that there is an enzyme that's supposed to make repairs to the genetic structure of a cell if it is damaged, as well as a terminator enzyme that destroys the cell when genetic damage is too great.

So, if the telomeres reached a length that became "damaging", the cell would apoptosize. Essentially destroying tissue if it is to reccurrent,

As for mechanical damage, that matters little as long as cellular reproduction is continued, because the continued reproduction of cells is what maintains "mechanical" stability. The way to fix mechanical damage would simply be initiating cell growth and division: a feat easily accomplished with portioned amounts of steriods.

No steroid comes without side effect, which also result in mechanical damage to the tissues experiencing them. But even if you could totally stop genetic damage (and it would take alot more knowledge than we have now), to make cells divide quiockly enough to evade mechanical ageing (which includes injury) would require massive amounts of energy, as well as the risk of it mucking up and causing cancer outbreaks across the organism involved. And, if there did indeed happen a genetic malfunction, cells would begin reproducing at their fast rate, propagating the deformity. Also, what if brain cells begin reproducing? That could result in injury or death if the bones cant keep up.

[Tuinor]

Hmm... Well, what if instead of trying to treat an entire organism at once with ungodly amounts of drugs and enzymes being pumped into their bodies we try work small with singular cells from tissues.

What we could do is take samle cells from a "subject/donor" of each of their many different types of tissues and using these grow cells that would be nutured with the same treatments mentioned early and then after they have undergone an inspection of their genetic stability, they are kept on ice until the "subject/donor" requires such cells. Then, all that would need doing would be the re-insertion of the cells in their rightfull place and allow the process to continue again. Of course, this wouldn't stop other cells from malfunctioning, but it would, given enough individual cells, start the life cycle of the persons tissues anew. Perhaps this might be a way of approaching it?

[Nautipus]

I agree, it could be a way to start, but the possibilities of genetic maladies are still very much real, especially cancer in these "perfect" cells. First, I believe, we would need a much more comprehensive knowledge of the function of all the parts of DNA, introns and exons alike, then proceed with, hopefully, fully biological and non drug-related alteration of the exhisting genome to fiit the needs of a specified host's malady, or shortcoming.

[Nautipus]

And now I'm very hungry and tired, TTYL, my good friend.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Tuinor

Hmm... Well, what if instead of trying to treat an entire organism at once with ungodly amounts of drugs and enzymes being pumped into their bodies we try work small with singular cells from tissues.

What we could do is take samle cells from a "subject/donor" of each of their many different types of tissues and using these grow cells that would be nutured with the same treatments mentioned early and then after they have undergone an inspection of their genetic stability, they are kept on ice until the "subject/donor" requires such cells. Then, all that would need doing would be the re-insertion of the cells in their rightfull place and allow the process to continue again. Of course, this wouldn't stop other cells from malfunctioning, but it would, given enough individual cells, start the life cycle of the persons tissues anew. Perhaps this might be a way of approaching it?

Originally Posted by Nautipus

I agree, it could be a way to start, but the possibilities of genetic maladies are still very much real, especially cancer in these "perfect" cells. First, I believe, we would need a much more comprehensive knowledge of the function of all the parts of DNA, introns and exons alike, then proceed with, hopefully, fully biological and non drug-related alteration of the exhisting genome to fiit the needs of a specified host's malady, or shortcoming.

Not to mention...we currently have a working system that extends the good aspects of a genetic line into the future. It doesn't require labs, or huge amounts of medical research, and it's been field-tested for millions of years. Why would we meddle with that?

[Nautipus]

Well, I dont necissarily agree with the proposition, but one must understand that it isnt about extending a genetic line, but about lengthening an individual's life, something far less grand.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Nautipus

Well, I dont necissarily agree with the proposition, but one must understand that it isnt about extending a genetic line, but about lengthening an individual's life, something far less grand.

That's kind of my problem with it. This generation, in the US, may be the first generation to have shorter lives then their parents. Let's process that, for a moment.

They're in that situation because they can't put down their forks. That's the long and short of it. You can add in a bit about fertility treatments, drug abuse, and a few other things that contribute to a population that can't scrape along without significant medical assistance, but essentially our problem is gluttony.

Now, back up a bit and look at how resources are apportioned, world-wide.

Then tell me that the appropriate use of our gifts is to extend the individual life of someone via genetic research. I'm having trouble seeing that as important.

[Nautipus]

The point you make is entirely valid, but like I said:

Originally Posted by Nautipus

Well, I dont necissarily agree with the proposition....

I dont think that extending human life through genetic alteration should be high of the list of things that should get more money. Gluttony is the main problem in this nation, I agree. I work out to keep myself fit, that is simply taking my own well being into my own hands, it's not genetics.

[BeardofPants]

Originally Posted by Nautipus

First, we need to figure out what conciousness is, then what subconcious is, then find a way to equate that to known biological processes (along with finding out what memories are), then we will be on the right track.

You should read the wiki link I posted. He predicts that we will soon be able to build the human brain.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by BeardofPants

You should read the wiki link I posted. He predicts that we will soon be able to build the human brain.

Can he build me one? Mine's broken.

[Nerdanel]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Can he build me one? Mine's broken.

and mine is full! i need an external brain.