X-Message-Number: 7766
From: 
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 11:43:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Reply to Joe: Clones and aging.

Date sent:  26-FEB-1997 11:16:53 

Joe, you assume they have selected one cell out of several million to 
clone that has not aged or has recovered from aging. Then you claim DNA 
damage cause aging. Does that mean the DNA of mice are more often damaged
than that of humans? You also mention limited cell division. Has enough 
Hayflick experiments been done with different animals e.g. mouse, horse and 
turtle that one can draw a curve to demostrate his idea is correct for all
animals. E.G. Mouse cell divides 3X, horse 18x and a turtle 200X or some 
related ratio. I think not. And why not?

But let assume this was just an average cell they cloned would it not 
mean all theories on aging will have to be revised?

J.C.


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7766