Today I’ll point out a view of the divide between theories of programmed aging and non-programmed aging, written from one of the more prominent programmed aging theorists in our community. I think it matters deeply as to whether we are guided by the theory that aging is caused by accumulated damage, or whether we are guided by the theory that aging is caused by an evolved program that is actively selected for. Is aging a matter of damage causing epigenetic change and cell dysfunction or a matter of epigenetic change causing damage and cell dysfunction?
This is an important divide in the research community. The strategies for treating aging that must be proposed, agreed upon, and funded in well in advance of any evidence of effectiveness are very different in either case, and there is no reason to believe that the strategies of the wrong camp will prove to be useful. This is because addressing root causes is a powerful way to produce sizable gains, removing many downstream problems. Addressing downstream problems, on the other hand, has very limited utility: it is much harder, the benefits are much smaller, and the root