Re: metabolism and repair

[John M <***>]

Judith,
I take 'replication' in two ways: one is that of a
species in the gender-combination mode, definitely not
the replication of individuals, what it is not, (2 of
them - different - produce a 3rd kind, not a replica
of either) and the 'real one', the prokaryotic
mitosis, producing identical replicas. Prokaryotes
don't age, the senedcence does not occur as we know
it, however outside impact may interfere with their
'immortality.

Then there is the 'replication' of damaged (destroyed)
organs (cells) in repair, which is not necessarily
true, even if reserve stem-cells activate the
re-growing of an organ or cell, they may be adjusted
to a 'later phase' (aged?) state, vs the
embyonic-state original formation. I am not sure that
the 'replication' word is a perfect cover for
'replacement' in the 'repair' domain. It is definitely
NOT for the replication of a damaged unit. (My
English?). 

Another thing to the 'owner' of the list: there is a
certain (decent?) netiquette-style which so far was
overwhelming on this list (and other decent ones as
well), not allowing "punk-style" posts to be
published. 
Beside flippant expressions I refer to the ones like 
"Hey, Jude" or "my man", etc. with no place in any
discussion with scientific stature. It is not a
pompous requirement, it keeps the level of the list
where it belongs to. There is but a small step from
this kind of deteriorating style to the ad personam
attacks what may mean the end of a well functioning
list.
This is my opinion and I don't want to debate it. You
and anybody else can agree or not. I, for one, try to
participate only in a civilized - not punk-style -
discussion.

John Mikes


--- Judith Rosen <***> wrote:

=== message truncated ===