Talk:Leonard Hayflick

Review comments
Some suggestions for improvement as the article is expanded:

Espresso Addict 01:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Some disorganisation and repetition between sections needs attention
 * Template:Infobox Scientist should be added
 * Photograph should be added from a source with a free license
 * Needs some copy editing and wikification
 * Some references present, but most material is unsourced
 * External link present which could be used to expand article

NPOV?
This article seems to read almost like a fan site. There are virtually no references given for the claims made about Hayflick's accomplishments. It is in dire need of an expert's attention. 2tuntony (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

August 25, 2010
COMMENT re: Weismann-Swim-Hayflick Limit

The antiquated idea that lifespan might be determined by the limited capacity of somatic cells to divide was originated by the famous German biologist August Weismann in 1892 (1). Mechnikov, who coined the term “gerontology,” discussed Weismann’s theory of cell division limit in his book “Essais optimistes” published in 1907 (2). In the 1950s the first convincing experimental evidence that animal cells in culture cannot be propagated indefinitely was presented by Swim, Parker, and Haff from Western Reserve University School of Medicine (3 – 5), and their results were reproduced by Hayflick and Moorhead in 1961 (6). The popular press has persisted in using the term “The Hayflick Limit” to promote the scientifically naïve idea that the human lifespan is determined by a limited number of cell divisions, although the relevance of finite divisions by fibroblasts in culture to lifespan in an organism, e.g. a person, is highly questionable (7, 8, 9). The observation that many types of cells derived from normal tissue have a finite capacity to divide in culture might be more accurately termed the Weismann-Swim-Hayflick Limit (10).
 * 1. Weismann, A. (1892). Uber Leben und Tod. Verlag von Gustav Fisher, Jena.
 * 2. Mechnikov, I.I. (1907). Essais optimistes. Paris, 438 p.
 * Author: Mechnikov, I. I. (Ilíà Ilich), 1845-1916
 * Subject: Longévité Publisher: Paris: A. Maloine
 * Language: French; Russian Call number: b1650679
 * Digitizing sponsor: University of Ottawa
 * Written in French. Titre original: Etiudy optimizma.

MoJohn47 (talk) 17:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)MoJohn
 * 3. Haff, R.F. and Swim, H.E. (1956). Serial propagation of 3 strains of rabbit fibroblasts; their susceptibility to infection with Vaccinia virus. Proc.Soc.Exp.Biol.Med., 93, 200-204.
 * 4. Swim, H.E. and Parker, R.F. (1957). Culture characteristics of human fibroblasts propagated serially. Am.J.Hygiene, 66, 235-243.
 * 5. Swim, H.E. (1959). Microbiological aspects of tissue culture. Ann.Rev.Microbiol. 13, 141-176.
 * 6. Hayflick, L., Moorhead, P.S. The serial cultivation of human diploid cell strains.  Exp Cell Res. 1961;25:585-621.
 * 7. Rubin H. The disparity between human cell senescence in vitro and lifelong replication in vivo.  Nat Biotechnol. 2002 Jul;20(7):675-81. Review. PMID: 12089551
 * 8. Macieira-Coelho A. The implications of the 'hayflick limit' for aging of the organism have been misunderstood by many gerontologists.  Gerontology. 1995;41(2):94-7. Review. 1995;41(4):241. PMID: 7744273
 * 9. de Magalhães JP. From cells to ageing: a review of models and mechanisms of cellular senescence and their impact on human ageing.  Exp Cell Res. 2004 Oct 15;300(1):1-10. Review.PMID: 15383309
 * 10. Gavrilov, L.A. and Gavrilova, N.S. (1991). The Biology of Life Span: a Quantitative Approach. Harwood Academic Publishers GMBH, Chur, etc. ISBN: 3-7186-4983-7.


 * Greetings,
 * I support comments made by MoJohn47 and suggest that they be added to the article.  I also agree with 2tuntony  that this article is in dire need of an expert's attention.  Here are some relevant excerpts from a scientific book, which may help to those who will do such rewriting:
 * http://longevity-science.org/pdf/Biology-of-Lifespan-5.6.pdf
 * Good luck!
 * Gavrilov (talk) 23:56, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

MoJohn47's argument is a serious distortion of the facts. So much confusion here that I don't know where to start and it's not worth addressing each point. The Hayflick limit relates to the immortality of primary cells in culture. Arguments regarding the relevance of the Hayflick limit to organismal longevity belong elsewhere, not on this bio page.

C64rocks (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leonard Hayflick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040603140939/http://www.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/en/aktuelles/hayflick.htm to http://www.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/en/aktuelles/hayflick.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Aging
Is there am Aging category? Does tagging him a biogerontolist sufficient? If there is a project template for the talk page, surely Hayflick's research at the cellular level qualifies. MaynardClark (talk) 22:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Book title in lead perhaps too detailed
The present, deluxe version:

Hayflick is the author of the book, How and Why We Age, published in August 1994 by Ballantine Books, NYC and available since 1996 as a paperback. This book has been translated into nine languages and is published in Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Japan, Poland, Russia, and Spain. It was a selection of the Book of the Month Club and has sold over 50,000 copies worldwide.

A sufficient version:

Hayflick is the author of the book, How and Why We Age, published in August 1994. This book has been translated into nine languages and has sold over 50,000 copies worldwide.

Especially with the lead already on the long side, this trim seems justified. &mdash; MaxEnt 20:49, 7 October 2018 (UTC)