Are they refered to as such? If not then why?

Because they represent an interpretation of the interventional commonalities shared by numerous diseases thought to contribute to aging. For example, with mitoSENS, there are a number of conditions that result in, as well as caused by mitochondrial dysfunction and molecular oxidative-damage induced morbidities.

Well, thats the same as it is with a lot of "diseases" isnt it? A broad definition at times? Like cancer for example. There are tons of forms of cancer that are all caused by different combinations of things.

Anybody else?

This brings up an interesting point. Money goes to research diseases but not aging. Maybe we should come up with some new names for the SENS 7 damage. Names that imply that it is a disease condition. That way the NIH and FDA might eventually come to allow medications and therapies to treat them. Once upon a time becoming fragile was "just a part of getting old". Now brittle bones are a disease (osteoporosis) and garner a lot of research dollars. Losing muscle mass was once just a part of getting old, now it is called sacropenia and is a legitimate field of research with a lot of funding.

First try:

Glucosepane accumulation = glucosepanitis (ok, kind-of funny, but you get the point)

Good idea. We could start refering to lipofuscin as a disease, or maybe lipofuscinitis. We should be sure to get this included in a petition with CEL collaboration we may do, or if we dont then in our own petition. We can outline those examples some in our efforts to convince them too. We can show them that theres a trend of more and more things becoming realized as diseases.

This is a good idea. Some of them might already have disease-like names, like the systemic amyloidoses. Others could certainly be given names. They would probably not end in "itis", as that suffix implies an inflammation of whatever the root word is. I'm not sure how something gets formally classified as a "disease"; something tells me that there's more to it than just naming it, but a name is a start. Rather than trying to get "aging" classified as a disease, it would be a lot easier to sneak in at least some of The Seven Things individually. It would potentially be more useful anyway, as it would tend to focus research. This seems like the kind of thing that CEL might be interested in, or have some ideas about.

Well, we could sneak them in, but if we get names that sound more like diseases ready, (that alone is not likely going to do anything, thats just part of it) and pay an experienced petition writer, then it seems like we could petition for them all at once while dragging a lot of great general awareness for the cause along with it. CEL could do it yes, but Tom over there is all but AWOL, busy writing a book and other things, and we arent sure how much longer that might be.

Go ad free, join ImmInst as a Full Member.