The Case for Programmed Mammal Aging

Are the deteriorative processes associated with mammal aging purposely and actively programmed by the organism’s design or are they merely a passive result of the organism’s inability to better resist damage from fundamental deteriorative processes? This question has now persisted for 150 years. Historically, observational evidence generally favors active aging. However, the nature of the evolution process has been thought to preclude evolution and retention of organism design features that purposely cause deterioration or otherwise actively limit life span. More recently, discoveries such as aging genes have increased the weight of empirical evidence for programmed aging and our increasing knowledge regarding the nature of the mammal inheritance process has added to questions regarding the validity of traditional evolutionary mechanics concepts. Alternatives to traditional mechanics concepts have subsequently appeared, most of which support active aging, and theories of biological aging based on the alternative evolutionary mechanics theories have been produced. This article compares active and passive aging concepts in light of various observations, provides an overview of the historical interaction between aging theory and evolution theory, and outlines major issues that currently exist regarding the mechanics of evolution. A specific candidate structure for an active mammal aging mechanism is presented and a specific evolutionary rationale, an evolvability theory of aging, which allows for the evolution of that mechanism, is suggested. This issue has substantial public health implications because understanding of massively age-dependent conditions such as cancer demands understanding of the aging process. Also, active theories suggest significant additional possibilities for treatment of age-related conditions.