Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Desperate_Food7354 OP t1_j3t3sdu wrote

Reply to comment by Shamwowz21 in Arguments against calling aging a disease make no sense relative to other natural processes we attempt to fix. by Desperate_Food7354

We are not talking about chronological aging but biological aging, I don’t even know how it’s possible for you to get the two mixed up in the context of the conservation, it’s not like we are trying to prevent time from passing in the universe? lmao. Biological aging can be measured with dna methylation.

1

Shamwowz21 t1_j3u2aeu wrote

I have no clue where you got that from, as I’m also arguing there are other ways to measure aging other than the passage of time (damage to cells, senescent cells, toxic byproducts, etc.). The very process of this is aging, and the damage is a symptom of said disease. You can experience 500 years without ‘aging’ as one can simply become older, without proof of change in their body (damage i.e aging) due to tech preventing it, and restoring all marks of aging (scarification).

1

Desperate_Food7354 OP t1_j3u2j87 wrote

I literally just told you, biological aging…

1

Shamwowz21 t1_j3u43by wrote

I don’t believe you read what I wrote, because I am speaking of biological aging.

1