| Literature DB >> 32693105 |
Alan A Cohen1, Brian K Kennedy2, Ulrich Anglas3, Anne M Bronikowski4, Joris Deelen5, Frédérik Dufour6, Gerardo Ferbeyre7, Luigi Ferrucci8, Claudio Franceschi9, Daniela Frasca10, Bertrand Friguet11, Pierrette Gaudreau12, Vadim N Gladyshev13, Efstathios S Gonos14, Vera Gorbunova15, Philipp Gut16, Mikhail Ivanchenko17, Véronique Legault18, Jean-François Lemaître19, Thomas Liontis20, Guang-Hui Liu21, Mingxin Liu22, Andrea B Maier23, Otávio T Nóbrega24, Marcel G M Olde Rikkert25, Graham Pawelec26, Sylvie Rheault27, Alistair M Senior28, Andreas Simm29, Sonja Soo30, Annika Traa31, Svetlana Ukraintseva32, Quentin Vanhaelen33, Jeremy M Van Raamsdonk34, Jacek M Witkowski35, Anatoliy I Yashin36, Robert Ziman37, Tamàs Fülöp38.
Abstract
At a recent symposium on aging biology, a debate was held as to whether or not we know what biological aging is. Most of the participants were struck not only by the lack of consensus on this core question, but also on many basic tenets of the field. Accordingly, we undertook a systematic survey of our 71 participants on key questions that were raised during the debate and symposium, eliciting 37 responses. The results confirmed the impression from the symposium: there is marked disagreement on the most fundamental questions in the field, and little consensus on anything other than the heterogeneous nature of aging processes. Areas of major disagreement included what participants viewed as the essence of aging, when it begins, whether aging is programmed or not, whether we currently have a good understanding of aging mechanisms, whether aging is or will be quantifiable, whether aging will be treatable, and whether many non-aging species exist. These disagreements lay bare the urgent need for a more unified and cross-disciplinary paradigm in the biology of aging that will clarify both areas of agreement and disagreement, allowing research to proceed more efficiently. We suggest directions to encourage the emergence of such a paradigm.Entities:
Keywords: Aged; Aging; Aging interventions; Aging mechanisms; Aging paradigm; Biology of aging; Epidemiology of aging; Evolution of aging; Philosophy of science
Year: 2020 PMID: 32693105 PMCID: PMC7603428 DOI: 10.1016/j.mad.2020.111316
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mech Ageing Dev ISSN: 0047-6374 Impact factor: 5.432