Rethinking modern theories of ageing and their classification: the proximate mechanisms and the ultimate explanations

Author:

Chmielewski Piotr1

Affiliation:

1. Division of Anatomy, Department of Human Morphology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine , Wrocław Medical University , Poland

Abstract

Abstract For a very long time, ageing has been an insurmountable problem in biology. The collection of age-dependent changes that render ageing individuals progressively more likely to die seemed to be an intractable labyrinth of alterations and associations whose direct mechanisms and ultimate explanations were too complex and difficult to understand. The science of ageing has always been fraught with insuperable problems and obstacles. In 1990, Zhores Medvedev presented a list of roughly 300 different hypotheses to illustrate this remarkable complexity of the ageing process and various approaches to understanding its mechanisms, though none of these hypotheses or aspect theories could be the general theory of senescence. Moreover, in the light of current data some of these ideas are obsolete and inapplicable. Nonetheless, the misconception that there are hundreds of valid theories of ageing persists among many researchers and authors. In addition, some of these obsolete and discarded hypotheses, such as the rate of living theory, the wear and tear theory, the poisoning theory, or the entropy theory still can be found in today’s medical textbooks, scientific publications aimed at the general public, and even in scientific writing. In fact, there are only several modern theories of ageing supported by compelling evidence that attempt to explain most of the data in current gerontology. These theories are competing to be a general and integrated model of ageing, making it unlikely that all of them could be true. This review summarises briefly several selected modern theories of senescence in the light of the contemporary knowledge of the biological basis for ageing and current data.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Anthropology,Health (social science)

Cited by 17 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3