In <3d6mvd$49i at mserv1.dl.ac.uk> <rattan at kemi.aau.dk> writes:
>That was exactly the point. There are symptoms and signs of ageing that may
>be specific or in some cases, as in the case of AGEs, a bit more widely
>observed than others, yet an extremely large variation in the extent
>and rate of occurrence of any such symptoms make them useless as predictors
>of real biological age. This discussion had started in response to an
>enquiry "how do you determine the age of a rat caught from somewhere outside..?
>There are no markers of individual age. There are trends, possibilites on
>a huge scatter plot.
>Suresh Rattan/Denmark
The original poster wished to determine _chronological_ age.
In:
Testing the Theories of Aging - Chapter 2 - Longevity is Determined by
Specific Genes : Testing the Hypothesis :
Section VII. BIOMARKERS OF AGING AND LONGEVITY
Richard Cutler (citing Bada, 1980) implies that determining the degree
of racemisation will give a reliable indication of chronological age.
Perhaps someone can comment on this with authority. :-)
--
________________________
(I_lurk,_therefore_I_am!_\ ,,, Steve Chambers
(o o) steve at chambers.ak.planet.co.nz
----------------------oOO--(_)--OOo-----------------------------
