• 电子商务的增长正在改变全球零售业的格局。
  • 随着太空探索的进展,商业航天领域迎来了新的发展机遇。
  • 在线教育的兴起为全球学习者提供了更多样化的学习资源和途径。
  • 随着人们对健康意识的提高,健康食品和生活方式受到更多关注。
  • 在线健身课程的流行反映了人们对于健康生活方式的追求。
  • 在线教育平台的兴起正在改变传统教育体系。
  • 数据隐私成为数字时代最受关注的问题之一。
  • 移动支付和数字货币正在逐渐取代传统支付方式。
  • 全球健康危机加速了医疗保健行业的数字化转型。
  • 在线教育平台的兴起为传统教育模式带来了挑战和机遇。
  • 全球健康危机凸显了公共卫生体系的重要性和改革的必要性。
  • 自动化和机器人技术在制造业中的应用提高了生产效率。
  • 随着疫苗接种率的提升,全球经济逐步走向复苏。
  • 全球健康危机凸显了公共卫生体系的脆弱性和改革需求。
  • 智能家居设备的发展正在改变人们的生活方式。
  • 全球健康危机加速了医疗保健行业的数字化转型。
  • 社交媒体在政治动员和社会运动中的作用越来越显著。
  • 电子商务的快速发展对传统零售业造成了巨大冲击。
  • 随着人工智能技术的不断进步,机器学习正在成为教育领域的新趋势。
  • 电子竞技的崛起为体育娱乐领域带来新的商业模式。
  • 隐私保护和数据安全在数字化时代变得更加重要。
  • 网络安全漏洞频发,个人信息保护成为公众关注的焦点。
  • 环保意识的提升促使消费者更倾向于购买可持续产品。
  • 5G技术的推广将为物联网和智能城市带来革命性的变化。
  • 海洋塑料污染问题引起了全球范围内的环保行动。
  • Is aging “normal”? | Johnson | Aging Pathobiology and Therapeutics

    Open Access | Editorial
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

    Is aging “normal”?


    Chloe Johnsona, Warren Ladigesa, *

    a Department of Comparative Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.

    * Corresponding author: Warren Ladiges
    Mailing address: Department of Comparative Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
    Email: wladiges@uw.edu

    Received: 16 December 2022 / Accepted: 21 December 2022 / Published: 29 December 2022

    DOI: 10.31491/APT.2022.12.102

    Abstract

    The descriptive term “normal” aging is often used in scientific literature to indicate commonly occurring changes with increasing age in the absence of overt disease. However, significant molecular and geropathological changes are increasingly present to indicate there is nothing normal about aging. Thus, the term “normal” aging is scientifically incorrect. There are changes in multiple genetic and epigenetic processes and pathways that drive aging, and some individuals are more resilient to these changes than others. Thus, “resilient” aging would be a more correct term to represent a major emphasis on investigating mechanisms and therapeutic targets for resilience, rather than a label of “normal” aging that is misleading and currently receives relatively little attention.

    Keywords

    Aging, “Normal” aging, age-related changes, geropathology, resilient aging


    Everyone increases in chronological age once a year, which is considered a normal event and celebrated (or not) on a regular basis. But is there such a thing as normal aging? Normal aging is a descriptive term used frequently in published scientific literature to indicate processes and pathways that similarly change with increasing age in a majority of the population in the absence of overt disease.
    However, if we take a look beneath the surface, deep into pathological changes that occur in cells with increasing age, nothing appears normal. And in fact, changes become more abnormal with increasing chronological age. So-called “normal” histological changes are considered lesions because histologically they are different from the histology seen at younger ages. Is there such a thing as a normal lesion? We think not, even though many pathologists view the presence of age-related lesions as a normal occurrence for older age groups.
    An age-related lesion is considered abnormal because it is not normal in the true sense of geropathology, even though it may not be related to any type of overt disease [1]. It is still a lesion and still not normal. The development of age-related lesions occurs as the result of changes in gene function over time that challenges the way cells can operate, and forces them to adapt. With this adaptation, cells respond in any number of ways depending on their specific role in a tissue milieu. Fibroblasts, for example, respond to develop fibrosis, which in the majority of cases is mild, intermittent, and highly localized. These types of mild age-related lesions are not normal, but yet not generally associated with a disruption in the overall function of a particular organ.
    The point of this brief discourse is to provide a convincing argument that the term “normal aging” should not be used because it is scientifically incorrect. Aging consists of abnormal changes that occur over time and in varying degrees in every living creature. In human aging, we know that some individuals are more resilient, so maintain a physically and mentally fit condition with increasing age, while others are less resilient and become increasingly compromised with increasing age [2]. There is thus a tendency to label resilience to aging as normal aging and lack of resilience as abnormal aging. Again, this description lacks scientific merit because changes are still occurring in both resilient and non-resilient groups, but in relative degrees.
    We have evidence of the relative nature of resilience to aging in one of our mouse models using brain aging as an example. We recently described naturally occurring age-related cognitive impairment (ARCI) in middle-aged C57BL/6 mice [3]. Interestingly, only about half of the mice tested showed strong evidence of cognitive impairment. The other half was only mildly impaired, but still not normal compared to younger-aged mice. Preliminary observations with molecular and transcriptomic profiling suggested relative differences between resilient and nonresilient brain aging groups in several aging pathways compared to the young mouse group. The point is that brain aging, and aging in general is not a progression of normalcy with increasing age. It is a pathway of abnormal changes that gradually increase in intensity in all of us, yet some are fortunate to have levels of innate resilience and appear to be relatively healthy at an old age, while others are less fortunate and are faced with varying degrees of compromised living and age-related disease at old age.
    So, to answer our question- Is aging “normal”? That would be an emphatic NO. There are changes in multiple processes and pathways that drive aging, and as we have emphasized, some individuals are better equipped to handle these changes, at least for a period of time, than others. Thus, the concept of “resilient” aging would be much more productive in investigating mechanisms and therapeutic targets than the label of “normal” aging which currently receives relatively little attention.

    Declarations

    Authors’ contributions

    The authors have contributed equally to this work.

    Availability of data and materials

    Not applicable.

    Financial support and sponsorship

    Supported in part by NIH grant R01 AG057381 (Ladiges, PI).

    Conflicts of interest

    Warren Ladiges is a member of the Editorial Board of Aging Pathobiology and Therapeutics. All authors declare no conflict of interest and were not involved in the journal’s review or decisions related to this manuscript.

    References

    1. Klug J, Christensen S, Imai DM, Snider TA, & Ladiges W. The geropathology of organ-specific aging. J Transl Sci, 2021, 7(1). [Crossref]

    2. Lei H, Huffman DM, Salmon AB, LeBrasseur NK, Carter C, Richardson A, et al. Resilience to aging is a heterogeneous characteristic defined by physical stressors. Aging Pathobiol Ther, 2022, 4(1): 19-22. [Crossref]

    3. Daneshjoo S, Park JY, Moreno J, Rosenfeld M, Darvas M, & Ladiges W. A mouse model of naturally occurring agerelated cognitive impairment. Aging Pathobiol Ther, 2022, 4(3): 87-89. [Crossref]



    Subscribe to receive issue release notifications
    and newsletters from journals