In article <6rb7om$nkn at sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>,
sbharris at ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris) wrote:
> That's a real possibility except for one piece of evidence: your
> germ line. There aren't that many ova to weed out. Only one (usually)
> is released per cycle, and with sperm around, a reasonable fraction of
> these become babies (10% ?). Those zygotes have no non-repairable
> damage (aging). We don't see prematurely aging babies because the
> mitochondria of the ova of the human race have been getting acumulated
> free radical damage for the the last couple of million years.
Eh? i dont follow. but i have a question: you said babies dont age
prematurely, which obvioulsy is true for the most part. what about those
genetic defects (damn forgot the name) in which the person ages at an
accelerated rate so that they look like they are 70 when they are 7. or
is this missing the point? im not sure because i didnt quite follow you.
also, whose ova is a million years old? now that i really dont understand.
how can a person's eggs be older than they are?
hazel
