• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Aging in infants


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 cytg

  • Guest
  • 34 posts
  • 2

Posted 13 July 2021 - 06:41 PM

Sorry if this is misplaced, delete it if appropriate.

I have a question I dont know how to get an answer to anywhere else, so here goes :).


Some predicates.


Cell division -> aging.

Aging starts at inception.

Homo Sapiens brain is largely done cooking ~50k years ago, late stoneage.

50k years ago homo sapiens evolution stalled in terms of natural selection (by and large).

There is ~3.5 generations pr century.

50k years -> 500 centuries -> 17500 generations of human.

Spermatogonia develops at ~2 months of age.


And this is it. Spermatogonia develops at 2 months of age, which seems to me that every infant has a whopping 2 months of aging on the clock, of the DNA before then next generation DNA is "written in stone".

17.5k generations * 2 months -> 35k months 

35k months / 12 -> 2916 years.


SO. Why are our babies not looking like 3000 years old people? :).

Maybe even so, still some evolution is going on, culling the hurd?

Maybe aging at 0 to 2 months does not carry the same penalty as aging 50 to 50+2months


Can someone drop some knowledge on this for me?




#2 Raphy

  • Member
  • 77 posts
  • 26
  • Location:France

Posted 14 July 2021 - 12:40 PM

You might be interested by this story: Epigenetic clocks reveal a rejuvenation event during embryogenesis followed by aging

  • Informative x 1

Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 cytg

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 34 posts
  • 2

Posted 14 July 2021 - 06:55 PM


I knew I came to the right place. Thanks :).

  • like x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: aging

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users