ANOMALIES
“When persistent efforts by the best researchers fail to resolve the anomalies, the community begins to lose confidence in the paradigm and a crisis period ensues in which serious alternatives can now be entertained.”
–Thomas Nickles
Although the terms “theory” and “paradigm” are frequently conflated, they do not have identical meanings.i However, for purposes of analyzing the significance of anomalies, the important conceptual point is the same. If one cannot explain why certain observed phenomena are inconsistent with the current aging paradigm, then it means that the paradigm itself is flawed. Thus, according to Thomas Kuhn, a paradigm shift is mandated when scientists encounter anomalies that cannot be explained by the current paradigm that can be better explained by a proposed new paradigm.ii Unexplainable anomalies constitute Kuhn’s second prerequisite for a paradigm shift.
This essay will briefly discuss a number of such anomalies.
The Current Paradigm is Inconsistent with Principles of Natural Selection
Aging in Other Species
One of the core preconceptions of the current aging paradigm is that biological aging is a monolithic genetically inherited trait shared by all complex organisms. The reality is that the only species that suffers from FDS is homo sapiens. Thus the preconception itself is inaccurate. The anomaly comes from the fact that only one species suffers from FDS. Since all mammalian species other than humans have maintenance systems that remain fully effective throughout their natural lifespans, it is anomalous that humans appear to have maintenance systems that typically are less than fully effective as early as the third decade of one’s life.
This anomaly is discussed more fully in the essay entitled “Aging in Other Species.”
Entropy Anomaly
Similarly, gravity plays a significant role in entropy, so the NPA paradigm would predict that, like lack of physical activity, the absence of gravity would be expected to extend lifespan. In his fictional book Contact, Carl Sagan imagined a future in which extremely wealthy humans would live in luxury satellites circling the earth in the belief that the absence of gravity would prevent wear and tear, thus eliminating aging and making them immortal.
The New Paradigm provides a ready explanation. The way to reconcile these anomalies is by recognizing the role of maintenance processes. Physical activity increases the rate at which damage is inflicted, but because that activity enhances the performance of certain maintenance processes, the net result is a reduction in the accumulation of damage. The absence of gravity decreases the rate at which damage is inflicted, but because the absence of gravity disrupts certain maintenance processes, the net result is an increase in the accumulation of damage.
Flawed Empirical Model
At the other end of the spectrum, there are a large and growing number of people in their fifth, sixth or even seventh decade of life that show almost no signs of being afflicted with FDS. If the current paradigm is correct that all older people are inevitably subject to the same aging process, then each older person who shows no apparent signs of being afflicted with FDS is an unexplainable anomaly for the current paradigm.
Unlike “aging,” there are certain symptoms of FDS that are reversible. Among the dozens of physiological changes that are associated with aging. Decreases in physical performance (strength, stamina, mobility, coordination, balance, etc.), bone mineral density, muscle mass and tone, cognitive function, homeostatic mechanisms, heart rate variability, and increased insulin resistance are just some of the recognized symptoms of aging. In the conventional model, all of these symptoms are inextricable components of the aging trait. Thus, under the current paradigm, each of these symptoms must be irreversible.
The conventional response is to ignore the implications of the fact that core characteristics of the supposedly irreversible aging process are reversible. Instead, adherents to the current paradigm dismiss the empirical facts with the statement that we already know that lifestyle changes are good for you, and doctors already recommend an improved diet and more physical activity. But the role of science is not simply to recommend solutions. Science is supposed to tell us how and why phenomena occur. If the observed phenomena (older persons able to improve functionality in multiple modalities) is inconsistent with the current paradigm, and that inconsistency cannot be explained, then the current paradigm is flawed and it is time for a shift.