Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

a4mula t1_j3ln1s6 wrote

Reply to comment by Mokebe890 in Arguments against calling aging a disease make no sense relative to other natural processes we attempt to fix. by Desperate_Food7354

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.

1

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.

2

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.

1