Genes that both extend life and prote...

Genes that both extend life and protect against cancer identified

There are 3 comments on the EurekAlert! story from Oct 14, 2007, titled Genes that both extend life and protect against cancer identified. In it, EurekAlert! reports that:

“Now we are really getting there”

A person is 100 times more likely to get cancer at age 65 than at age 35. But new research reported today in the journal "Nature Genetics" identifies naturally occurring processes that allow many genes to both ... via EurekAlert!

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EurekAlert!.

Katherine

United States

#1 Oct 16, 2007
It might not be interesting for people who don't care about aging, but it will be very interesting for those who hate aging fast. Also, people will become less concerned about cancer if this research can help prevent cancer more. I think it will change the world a little more. We are learning more and more each day.

“BasicGenetics”

Since: Dec 07

Seattle

#2 Dec 7, 2007
are you describing telosomes? I think you might be and these stop BIOLOGICAL age not PHYSICAL age.
jybytbtjff

Los Angeles, CA

#3 Feb 1, 2012
e base. Is that self-pitying, to call for study? Maybe we should stop all research all together, just to satisfy your lax approach to life. Do you really think we shouldn't ask these questions? Fortunately, there are a lot of people like me out there who do intensive research on malaria and related topics. How much have you actually scrutinized the data on the issue? Have you even seen an actual research paper, not the ones in wikipedia? Or is this just self-denial on your part or for the sake of having the last word on the matter? Do you think that microorganisms aren't worth study? Without people like me all science is not possible. Next time you go to the doctors' offices remember all the people who actually die base. Is that self-pitying, to call for study? Maybe we should stop all research all together, jue base. Is that self-pitying, to call for study? Maybe we should stop all research all together, just to satisfy your lax approach to life. Do you really think we shouldn't ask these questions? Fortunately, there are a lot of people like me out there who do intensive research on malaria and related topics. How much have you actually scrutinized the data on the issue? Have you even seen an actual research paper, not the ones in wikipedia? Or is this just self-denial on your part or for the sake of having the last word on the matter? Do you think that microorganisms aren't worth study? Without people like me all science is not possible. Next time you go to the doctors' offices remember all the people who actually di

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Genetics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
1 attached, 1 unattached earlobe (Dec '07) Jul '17 Chimera 55
News 'Everyone is African': Geneticist, professor ta... (Oct '16) Jun '17 None 27
Confused about Nutritional Mutants Jun '17 eighsse 2
South Slavs are indeed slavic May '17 Anonymous 1
Questions about SNPS (single nucleotide polymor... May '17 Anonymous 1
Developed an earlobe? May '17 RyuuBeary 1
Chromosome 10 inversion (Apr '06) May '17 Redox 19
More from around the web