The general rule is that anything that is passed on in reproduction does not undergo senescence.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The evolutionary theory of senescence can be stated as follows: while bodies are not designed to fail, neither are they designed for extended operation.
We've spent the last few millennia aware that senescence is horrible but knowing nevertheless that it's inevitable. We've had to find some mechanism to put it out of our minds so we can get on with our miserably short lives.
Ageing is so many different things, and cells being able to self-renew is part of the picture but not all of it.
Perhaps genes did regulate the aging process. Perhaps different organisms had different life spans because a universal regulatory 'clock' was set to run at different speeds in different species.
I think there are two aspects to ageing: there's the physical side and what's happening inside.
In specific circumstances the period of aging decline can set in earlier in a particular organ than in the organism as a whole which, in a certain general or theoretical sense, is left a cripple or invalid.
There is an anti-aging possibility, but it has to come from within.
Immunity to obsolescence is the only obsolescent-immune conceit of the past millennium.
I don't believe one grows older. I think that what happens early on in life is that at a certain age one stands still and stagnates.
Once DNA acquires the ability to persist forever, the carriers become disposable. Essentially, our bodies are designed to last long enough to reproduce.