What do you think?
Rate this book
Sex and the Origins of Death
Death, for bacteria, is not inevitable. Protect a bacterium from predators, and provide it with adequate food and space to grow, and it would continue living--and reproducing asexually--forever. But a paramecium (a slightly more advanced single-cell organism), under the same ideal conditions,
would stop dividing after about 200 generations--and die. Death, for paramecia and their offspring, is inevitable. Unless they have sex. If at any point during that 200 or so generations, two of the progeny of our paramecium have sex, their clock will be reset to zero. They and their progeny are
granted another 200 generations. Those who fail to have sex eventually die. Immortality for bacteria is automatic; for all other living beings--including humans--immortality depends on having sex. But why is this so? Why must death be inevitable? And what is the connection between death and sexual
reproduction?
In Sex and the Origins of Death , William R. Clark looks at life and death at the level of the cell, as he addresses such profound questions as why we age, why death exists, and why death and sex go hand in hand. Clark reveals that there are in fact two kinds of cell death--accidental death,
caused by extreme cold or heat, starvation, or physical destruction, and "programmed cell death," initiated by codes embedded in our DNA. (Bacteria have no such codes.) We learn that every cell in our body has a self-destruct program embedded into it and that cell suicide is in fact a fairly
commonplace event. We also discover that virtually every aspect of a cell's life is regulated by its DNA, including its own death, that the span of life is genetically determined (identical twins on average die 36 months apart, randomly selected siblings 106 months apart), that human tissue in
culture will divide some 50 times and then die (an important exception being tumor cells, which divide indefinitely). But why do our cells have such programs? Why must we die? To shed light on this question, Clark reaches far back in evolutionary history, to the moment when "inevitable death" (death
from aging) first appeared. For cells during the first billion years, death, when it occurred, was accidental; there was nothing programmed into them that said they must die. But fierce competition gradually led to multicellular animals--size being an advantage against predators--and with this
change came cell specialization and, most important, germ cells in which reproductive DNA was segregated. When sexual reproduction evolved, it became the dominant form of reproduction on the planet, in part because mixing DNA from two individuals corrects errors that have crept into the code. But
this improved DNA made DNA in the other (somatic) cells not only superfluous, but dangerous, because somatic DNA might harbor mutations. Nature's solution to this danger, Clark concludes, was programmed death--the somatic cells must die. Unfortunately, we are the somatic cells. Death is necessary to
exploit to the fullest the advantages of sexual reproduction.
In Sex and the Origins of Death , William Clark ranges far and wide over fascinating terrain. Whether describing a 62-year-old man having a major heart attack (and how his myocardial cells rupture and die), or discussing curious life-forms that defy any definition of life (including bacterial
spores, which can regenerate after decades of inactivity, and viruses, which are nothing more than DNA or RNA wrapped in protein), this brilliant, profound volume illuminates the miraculous workings of life at its most elemental level and finds in these tiny spaces the answers to some of our largest
questions.
would stop dividing after about 200 generations--and die. Death, for paramecia and their offspring, is inevitable. Unless they have sex. If at any point during that 200 or so generations, two of the progeny of our paramecium have sex, their clock will be reset to zero. They and their progeny are
granted another 200 generations. Those who fail to have sex eventually die. Immortality for bacteria is automatic; for all other living beings--including humans--immortality depends on having sex. But why is this so? Why must death be inevitable? And what is the connection between death and sexual
reproduction?
In Sex and the Origins of Death , William R. Clark looks at life and death at the level of the cell, as he addresses such profound questions as why we age, why death exists, and why death and sex go hand in hand. Clark reveals that there are in fact two kinds of cell death--accidental death,
caused by extreme cold or heat, starvation, or physical destruction, and "programmed cell death," initiated by codes embedded in our DNA. (Bacteria have no such codes.) We learn that every cell in our body has a self-destruct program embedded into it and that cell suicide is in fact a fairly
commonplace event. We also discover that virtually every aspect of a cell's life is regulated by its DNA, including its own death, that the span of life is genetically determined (identical twins on average die 36 months apart, randomly selected siblings 106 months apart), that human tissue in
culture will divide some 50 times and then die (an important exception being tumor cells, which divide indefinitely). But why do our cells have such programs? Why must we die? To shed light on this question, Clark reaches far back in evolutionary history, to the moment when "inevitable death" (death
from aging) first appeared. For cells during the first billion years, death, when it occurred, was accidental; there was nothing programmed into them that said they must die. But fierce competition gradually led to multicellular animals--size being an advantage against predators--and with this
change came cell specialization and, most important, germ cells in which reproductive DNA was segregated. When sexual reproduction evolved, it became the dominant form of reproduction on the planet, in part because mixing DNA from two individuals corrects errors that have crept into the code. But
this improved DNA made DNA in the other (somatic) cells not only superfluous, but dangerous, because somatic DNA might harbor mutations. Nature's solution to this danger, Clark concludes, was programmed death--the somatic cells must die. Unfortunately, we are the somatic cells. Death is necessary to
exploit to the fullest the advantages of sexual reproduction.
In Sex and the Origins of Death , William Clark ranges far and wide over fascinating terrain. Whether describing a 62-year-old man having a major heart attack (and how his myocardial cells rupture and die), or discussing curious life-forms that defy any definition of life (including bacterial
spores, which can regenerate after decades of inactivity, and viruses, which are nothing more than DNA or RNA wrapped in protein), this brilliant, profound volume illuminates the miraculous workings of life at its most elemental level and finds in these tiny spaces the answers to some of our largest
questions.
208 pages, Hardcover
First published October 17, 1996
9 people are currently reading
343 people want to read
About the author
William R. Clark
36 books6 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name. This profile may contain books from multiple authors of this name.
Other authors publishing under this name are:
William R. Clark
William R. Clark
William R. Clark is Professor Emeritus of Immunology in the Department of Molecular, Cell and Developmental Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is the author of a number of books about biology, immunology, and evolution, including Sex and the Origins of Death, A Means to an End: The Biological Basis of Aging and Death, and The New Healers: The Promise and Problems of Molecular Medicine in the Twenty-First Century.
Other authors publishing under this name are:
William R. Clark
William R. Clark
William R. Clark is Professor Emeritus of Immunology in the Department of Molecular, Cell and Developmental Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is the author of a number of books about biology, immunology, and evolution, including Sex and the Origins of Death, A Means to an End: The Biological Basis of Aging and Death, and The New Healers: The Promise and Problems of Molecular Medicine in the Twenty-First Century.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
June 12, 2025
كتاب علمي عجيب، من أفضل الكتب التي طالعتها في عام.. تحرّجت في البداية من قراءته بسبب عنوانه - وقد اقترحه عليّ أحد برامج اقتراح الكتب - فإذا به من أجود الكتب، بل لعله من الكتب التي تزيد الإيمان، وإن لم يقصد مؤلفه ذلك
وقد كررته وأطلت فيه وتراخيت عن الانتهاء منه، لما فيه من عجائب ولموضوعه المهيب
أنصح به
وقد كررته وأطلت فيه وتراخيت عن الانتهاء منه، لما فيه من عجائب ولموضوعه المهيب
أنصح به
January 27, 2022
Clark, an immunologist, tells a (the) story of life. Life starts with self-replicating DNA. Replication is life’s sole mission. Biologically, it’s our sole mission.
Around four billion years ago, “single, free-living cells” (bacteria) arose from inanimate matter. “The earliest of these organisms, Clark states, “represented, then, as now, the simplest possible structure for carrying out the cardinal function of all living things: the reproduction of their own kind through replication of their DNA, and transmission of that DNA to offspring.” Initially, replication occurred asexually (fission). “In this mode of reproduction,” Clark writes, “a given cell autonomously replicates its own DNA and then divides into two perfectly coequal clones of itself, each clonal offspring receiving one copy of the DNA….Thus the organism–the single cell–never dies. After all, where is the body? Can there be death in the absence of a corpse? These cells are in effect immortal.”
Around two billion years ago, bacteria developed specializations to protect themselves from oxygen. They also increased their size to discourage predators and to store energy when food was scarce. This began the development of “multicellularity” and diploidy (cells that carried two copies of each chromosome), but harmful mutations came with this push toward complexity, resulting in the early death of the organism.
With sexual reproduction, in contrast, DNA is exchanged and recombined. Offspring from this union then develops through the fission process. This led to the “segregation of DNA to be used for reproductive purposes (conjugation) from the DNA used to direct the day-to-day operation of the cell.” The reproductive germ cell, walls off and protects the integrity of the DNA by fixing problems created by mutations (“mutations in a given gene of one sex partner will most often be compensated in the offspring by the unaltered copy of this gene from the other partner”). Genetic diversity also allows for variable, adaptive responses to environmental challenges. And there is an abundant supply of “DNA repair enzymes” within the germ cell relative to the somatic cells.
The sole function of the somatic cells that contain the “macronucleus” (“the extra-germinal somatic DNA”) is to maintain the body as the vehicle for the replicating DNA (contained in the germ cell and its micronucleus). The somatic cells (our bodies) then become superfluous. “Once they have carried out their task of ensuring the survival of the germ cells, they and their excess DNA are no longer needed,” Clark states. This leads to his second major point: Our somatic cells are programmed to die. He describes this in a step-by-step process in which individual cells break down into their component parts (“apoptosis”) and lose their interconnectedness and their ability to function in an integrated way. This “cell suicide” happens cell by cell, ending in organ failure and death. It is programmed senescence and our body’s end, as described by Clark, is not a pretty picture.
Clark’s argument is stated in a much shorter, less-edgy way than Dawkins': Our body is but a vehicle for immortal DNA. DNA lives forever, leaving one body after another behind in its wake. We, as conscious beings, love our bodies and want them to live forever—that is DNA’s hold over the mind.* But in the end, we are doomed “to unconnectedness, to chaos, and to silence.” Philosophically, DNA is being; our body is nothingness.
*"Whether we like it or not, the mind as brain is driven ultimately by DNA, this bizarre molecule that is in turn driven-mindlessly, we presume, yet somehow desperately-to reproduce itself.…That DNA may very well be standing next to our death bed in the form of a son or a daughter….[But] it matters not a whit that some of these somatic cells contain all that we hold most dear about ourselves; our ability to think, to feel, to love—to write and read these very words.”
Around four billion years ago, “single, free-living cells” (bacteria) arose from inanimate matter. “The earliest of these organisms, Clark states, “represented, then, as now, the simplest possible structure for carrying out the cardinal function of all living things: the reproduction of their own kind through replication of their DNA, and transmission of that DNA to offspring.” Initially, replication occurred asexually (fission). “In this mode of reproduction,” Clark writes, “a given cell autonomously replicates its own DNA and then divides into two perfectly coequal clones of itself, each clonal offspring receiving one copy of the DNA….Thus the organism–the single cell–never dies. After all, where is the body? Can there be death in the absence of a corpse? These cells are in effect immortal.”
Around two billion years ago, bacteria developed specializations to protect themselves from oxygen. They also increased their size to discourage predators and to store energy when food was scarce. This began the development of “multicellularity” and diploidy (cells that carried two copies of each chromosome), but harmful mutations came with this push toward complexity, resulting in the early death of the organism.
With sexual reproduction, in contrast, DNA is exchanged and recombined. Offspring from this union then develops through the fission process. This led to the “segregation of DNA to be used for reproductive purposes (conjugation) from the DNA used to direct the day-to-day operation of the cell.” The reproductive germ cell, walls off and protects the integrity of the DNA by fixing problems created by mutations (“mutations in a given gene of one sex partner will most often be compensated in the offspring by the unaltered copy of this gene from the other partner”). Genetic diversity also allows for variable, adaptive responses to environmental challenges. And there is an abundant supply of “DNA repair enzymes” within the germ cell relative to the somatic cells.
The sole function of the somatic cells that contain the “macronucleus” (“the extra-germinal somatic DNA”) is to maintain the body as the vehicle for the replicating DNA (contained in the germ cell and its micronucleus). The somatic cells (our bodies) then become superfluous. “Once they have carried out their task of ensuring the survival of the germ cells, they and their excess DNA are no longer needed,” Clark states. This leads to his second major point: Our somatic cells are programmed to die. He describes this in a step-by-step process in which individual cells break down into their component parts (“apoptosis”) and lose their interconnectedness and their ability to function in an integrated way. This “cell suicide” happens cell by cell, ending in organ failure and death. It is programmed senescence and our body’s end, as described by Clark, is not a pretty picture.
Clark’s argument is stated in a much shorter, less-edgy way than Dawkins': Our body is but a vehicle for immortal DNA. DNA lives forever, leaving one body after another behind in its wake. We, as conscious beings, love our bodies and want them to live forever—that is DNA’s hold over the mind.* But in the end, we are doomed “to unconnectedness, to chaos, and to silence.” Philosophically, DNA is being; our body is nothingness.
*"Whether we like it or not, the mind as brain is driven ultimately by DNA, this bizarre molecule that is in turn driven-mindlessly, we presume, yet somehow desperately-to reproduce itself.…That DNA may very well be standing next to our death bed in the form of a son or a daughter….[But] it matters not a whit that some of these somatic cells contain all that we hold most dear about ourselves; our ability to think, to feel, to love—to write and read these very words.”
December 31, 2023
الموت هو الموضوع الذي يُفزعنا ويسحرنا في آن معاً"
كتاب رائع يُظهر قدرة الله وإعجازه سبحانه وتعالى في خلق الإنسان، وخلق أصغر جزء فيه ألا وهو الخلية.
عنوان الكتاب قد يوحي بشيء آخر غير ما بداخله، فالكتاب علمي شديد السلاسة والإثارة، يثير شغفك للعلم، ويجعلك تلتهم صفحاته دون أن تشعر، ويدور موضوعه حول التكاثر في الكائنات الحية على مستوى الخلايا، وكيف أنه ينقسم إلى نوعين: تكاثر جنسي وتكاثر لاجنسي، والكتاب يعمل على رصد عملية الموت التى تحدث في أجسادنا على مستوى الخلايا ببراعة.
"فقد كشفت دراسة الموت على مستوى الخلايا عن أمور دقيقة ومعقدة لم تكن في الحسبان فيما يخص ماهيه الموت في الكائنات المتعددة الخلايا"
الكتاب يجيب عن العديد من الأسئلة المثيرة، منها:
ما الذي يدفع الخلايا للانتحار؟
ماذا يفعل الجسم في الخلايا الميتة؟
ما أسلحة الجهاز المناعي في الجسم؟
ما هو الموت المبرمج في الخلية؟
ما الذي يدفع لتشغيل هذا البرنامج؟ وما أهميته؟
كيف تشيخ الخلية؟
"من المهم أن نعي من وجهه النظر البيولوجية أن الجنس والتكاثر ظاهرتان منفصلتين كلياً"
"الجنس" يعني فقط تبادل أو تمازج كل أو جزء من المعلومات الجينية - DNA - بين عضوين من نفس النوع، فلا يعني الجنس أكثر من خليتين تلتصقان معا وتتقايضان أجزاء من إرثهما الصبغي DNA في عملية تدعى اقتران.
أما "التكاثر" فهو ببساطة إعادة انتاج نسخ إضافية من خلية معينة، بعملية بسيطة تسمى الانقسام أو الانشطار
إذن "التكاثر اللاجنسي" يتم بانقسام أو انشطار الخلية لإنتاج خلايا جديدة، إذا ما توفرت لها بيئة توفر الغذاء والأكسجين، والخلايا الناتجة تكون متماثلة جينياً مع الخلايا الوالدية.
و "التكاثر الجنسي" يحدث بين خليتين، تجد إحداهما الأخرى، وتقرر ملائمة كل منهما للأخرى، وتمارسا الجنس -أى تتبادلان DNA- ثم تتكاثران، وبذلك يتطلب التكاثر الجنسي فترة من الوقت، ومقداراً من الطاقة أكبر بكثير من الانشطار البسيط للوصول إلى النتيجة نفسها، وفى التكاثر الجنسي تكون الخلايا الجديدة مختلفة جينيا عن الخلايا الوالدية.
》الخلايا السرطانية من الخلايا التى تتكاثر لاجنسياً، لذا هي في حاله خلود كاملة، ولسوء الحظ ما لم تُعزل هذه الخلايا من الجسم فلن تنعم أبداً بحريتها الجديدة مدة طويلة، فهي لشراهتها الشديدة، وحاجاتها لمكان تنمو فيه، ستقتل في نهاية الأمر مضيفيها، وبالتالي نفسها في السياق نفسه.
"إن نسيجاً خالدا في جسد فانٍ، هو كارثةٌ بحق"
كتاب رائع يُظهر قدرة الله وإعجازه سبحانه وتعالى في خلق الإنسان، وخلق أصغر جزء فيه ألا وهو الخلية.
عنوان الكتاب قد يوحي بشيء آخر غير ما بداخله، فالكتاب علمي شديد السلاسة والإثارة، يثير شغفك للعلم، ويجعلك تلتهم صفحاته دون أن تشعر، ويدور موضوعه حول التكاثر في الكائنات الحية على مستوى الخلايا، وكيف أنه ينقسم إلى نوعين: تكاثر جنسي وتكاثر لاجنسي، والكتاب يعمل على رصد عملية الموت التى تحدث في أجسادنا على مستوى الخلايا ببراعة.
"فقد كشفت دراسة الموت على مستوى الخلايا عن أمور دقيقة ومعقدة لم تكن في الحسبان فيما يخص ماهيه الموت في الكائنات المتعددة الخلايا"
الكتاب يجيب عن العديد من الأسئلة المثيرة، منها:
ما الذي يدفع الخلايا للانتحار؟
ماذا يفعل الجسم في الخلايا الميتة؟
ما أسلحة الجهاز المناعي في الجسم؟
ما هو الموت المبرمج في الخلية؟
ما الذي يدفع لتشغيل هذا البرنامج؟ وما أهميته؟
كيف تشيخ الخلية؟
"من المهم أن نعي من وجهه النظر البيولوجية أن الجنس والتكاثر ظاهرتان منفصلتين كلياً"
"الجنس" يعني فقط تبادل أو تمازج كل أو جزء من المعلومات الجينية - DNA - بين عضوين من نفس النوع، فلا يعني الجنس أكثر من خليتين تلتصقان معا وتتقايضان أجزاء من إرثهما الصبغي DNA في عملية تدعى اقتران.
أما "التكاثر" فهو ببساطة إعادة انتاج نسخ إضافية من خلية معينة، بعملية بسيطة تسمى الانقسام أو الانشطار
إذن "التكاثر اللاجنسي" يتم بانقسام أو انشطار الخلية لإنتاج خلايا جديدة، إذا ما توفرت لها بيئة توفر الغذاء والأكسجين، والخلايا الناتجة تكون متماثلة جينياً مع الخلايا الوالدية.
و "التكاثر الجنسي" يحدث بين خليتين، تجد إحداهما الأخرى، وتقرر ملائمة كل منهما للأخرى، وتمارسا الجنس -أى تتبادلان DNA- ثم تتكاثران، وبذلك يتطلب التكاثر الجنسي فترة من الوقت، ومقداراً من الطاقة أكبر بكثير من الانشطار البسيط للوصول إلى النتيجة نفسها، وفى التكاثر الجنسي تكون الخلايا الجديدة مختلفة جينيا عن الخلايا الوالدية.
》الخلايا السرطانية من الخلايا التى تتكاثر لاجنسياً، لذا هي في حاله خلود كاملة، ولسوء الحظ ما لم تُعزل هذه الخلايا من الجسم فلن تنعم أبداً بحريتها الجديدة مدة طويلة، فهي لشراهتها الشديدة، وحاجاتها لمكان تنمو فيه، ستقتل في نهاية الأمر مضيفيها، وبالتالي نفسها في السياق نفسه.
"إن نسيجاً خالدا في جسد فانٍ، هو كارثةٌ بحق"
May 2, 2014
Why we die and how to beat it.
From the outset, what UCLA’s Wm. Clark reports is staggering: Death is “not an obligatory attribute of life,” he writes, and did not appear with the advent of it. Cellular aging resulting in death may not have occurred for more than a billion years after life’s first entry on earth. Programmed cell death (PCD) which we suffer (displayed through wrinkles and forgetfulness) seems to have arisen about the time cells were experimenting with sex.
Sex is an energy costly activity, engaged in because it rolls the genetic dice, inviting variations with each new offspring. An advantage because with environmental change what was well suited in the old world is often not suited for the new. Gene variations result, and through natural selection, a few offspring amongst the dying progenitors may survive to save the species. For example, bacteria reproduce though cloning themselves, and can do so at a rate of 16 million per hour from one parent (take your antibiotics). But when the environment becomes harsh, bacterial parents spontaneously engage in sex, swapping genes with others as a gamble on survival.
In a description of catastrophic cell death, Clark displays a talent to meet or exceed even Sagan’s best – clear, rich, compelling. Here heart attack, and the wonder of cell machinery resist the inevitable as systems and their backups struggle to counter power failures and starvation in a chain reaction of fading miracles. Like a community, some components are wholly unaware of disaster while others sacrifice themselves, transferring energy to last lines of defense - pumps stationed in cell walls countering a siege of water pressing in about to wash them away.
Such stunning, intentioned actions of this tiny, helpless, complex organism, the cell (of which we possess about 100 trillion – as many cells as there are stars in the nearest 400 spiral galaxies including the Milky Way!) is starkly contrasted against our cell’s decision to commit suicide. This happens when life is late, or as early as the womb when ancient relics of evolution are flushed out of us - like reminders of an ocean origin when interdigital webbing of our onetime fins are removed through PCD, leaving what’s left between our fingers. Once the nucleus decides to pull the trigger, one last set of instructions emerge as its DNA begins disassembling. All the while a stack of unread commands are being executed by unwary elements of the cell. The cell detaches from its neighbors, undulates, breaking into globules while still ignorant workers in these blobs work away, floating into a void, devoured by immune systems. Awful…
But there are rays of hope for immortality. “Growth factors” are given to cells like lymphocytes to put a safety on their trigger. And there are executioners in this tragedy, T-Cells. Having spotted an invader they do not murder the foreigner, they command the interloper to kill itself, orders dutifully followed. T-Cells know the security code.
Clarks notes an important difference between us and other “primitive” life forms. For example, paramecium dodge death by letting their macro-nuclei run the show while a micro-version lays dormant. After enough cell splitting, it has sex with another paramecium. Its macro-nuclei suffers PCD and the micro takes over as a newly minted micro-nucleus goes to sleep. Once eukaryotic cells (what we’re made of) became multicellular, reproductive DNA would be not only kept in separate nuclei (as the paramecium) but in separate cells – our germ cells (sperm, egg). The rest of us, our bodies, are their guardians, not only redundant and irrelevant but we turn dangerous with too many divisions. When our germ cells meet others, clocks are reset just as they are for paramecium. Sex can save our germ cells but it cannot save us.
These growth factors, security codes, telemeres or some other mechanism may finally be commandeered to salvage us from oblivion. For now, as Clark writes, we must die and there are many mechanisms built into us to make sure we do. Death does not just happen, it is worked toward, with safeguards to assure cells don’t backslide into immortality – as cancer cells do, a recipe for disaster. The winner is our species because germ cells are immortal through sex as we contribute molecular chains of ourselves to the future and whoever is made of us. Clark reveals this and so much more. A pure joy to read.
From the outset, what UCLA’s Wm. Clark reports is staggering: Death is “not an obligatory attribute of life,” he writes, and did not appear with the advent of it. Cellular aging resulting in death may not have occurred for more than a billion years after life’s first entry on earth. Programmed cell death (PCD) which we suffer (displayed through wrinkles and forgetfulness) seems to have arisen about the time cells were experimenting with sex.
Sex is an energy costly activity, engaged in because it rolls the genetic dice, inviting variations with each new offspring. An advantage because with environmental change what was well suited in the old world is often not suited for the new. Gene variations result, and through natural selection, a few offspring amongst the dying progenitors may survive to save the species. For example, bacteria reproduce though cloning themselves, and can do so at a rate of 16 million per hour from one parent (take your antibiotics). But when the environment becomes harsh, bacterial parents spontaneously engage in sex, swapping genes with others as a gamble on survival.
In a description of catastrophic cell death, Clark displays a talent to meet or exceed even Sagan’s best – clear, rich, compelling. Here heart attack, and the wonder of cell machinery resist the inevitable as systems and their backups struggle to counter power failures and starvation in a chain reaction of fading miracles. Like a community, some components are wholly unaware of disaster while others sacrifice themselves, transferring energy to last lines of defense - pumps stationed in cell walls countering a siege of water pressing in about to wash them away.
Such stunning, intentioned actions of this tiny, helpless, complex organism, the cell (of which we possess about 100 trillion – as many cells as there are stars in the nearest 400 spiral galaxies including the Milky Way!) is starkly contrasted against our cell’s decision to commit suicide. This happens when life is late, or as early as the womb when ancient relics of evolution are flushed out of us - like reminders of an ocean origin when interdigital webbing of our onetime fins are removed through PCD, leaving what’s left between our fingers. Once the nucleus decides to pull the trigger, one last set of instructions emerge as its DNA begins disassembling. All the while a stack of unread commands are being executed by unwary elements of the cell. The cell detaches from its neighbors, undulates, breaking into globules while still ignorant workers in these blobs work away, floating into a void, devoured by immune systems. Awful…
But there are rays of hope for immortality. “Growth factors” are given to cells like lymphocytes to put a safety on their trigger. And there are executioners in this tragedy, T-Cells. Having spotted an invader they do not murder the foreigner, they command the interloper to kill itself, orders dutifully followed. T-Cells know the security code.
Clarks notes an important difference between us and other “primitive” life forms. For example, paramecium dodge death by letting their macro-nuclei run the show while a micro-version lays dormant. After enough cell splitting, it has sex with another paramecium. Its macro-nuclei suffers PCD and the micro takes over as a newly minted micro-nucleus goes to sleep. Once eukaryotic cells (what we’re made of) became multicellular, reproductive DNA would be not only kept in separate nuclei (as the paramecium) but in separate cells – our germ cells (sperm, egg). The rest of us, our bodies, are their guardians, not only redundant and irrelevant but we turn dangerous with too many divisions. When our germ cells meet others, clocks are reset just as they are for paramecium. Sex can save our germ cells but it cannot save us.
These growth factors, security codes, telemeres or some other mechanism may finally be commandeered to salvage us from oblivion. For now, as Clark writes, we must die and there are many mechanisms built into us to make sure we do. Death does not just happen, it is worked toward, with safeguards to assure cells don’t backslide into immortality – as cancer cells do, a recipe for disaster. The winner is our species because germ cells are immortal through sex as we contribute molecular chains of ourselves to the future and whoever is made of us. Clark reveals this and so much more. A pure joy to read.
January 11, 2013
The book fulfills the promise of telling you where death comes from in living beings like us. It goes beyond talking about "how" and also touches upon "why", something I particularly appreciated. So many books about biology and evolution skip philosophical issues altogether as if there is nothing to talk or worry about. Like with any popular science book, depending on how much you know about biology or how much time you've already invested into thoughts about definitions of death or euthanasia, you may perhaps find some chapters too simplistic. However, for someone who does not remember much from the biology class at school, the "biological" chapters are amazingly clear and fascinating. There is lot of terminology (all in italics) but the concepts are explained so well that I have a very pleasant illusion of finally understanding everything about how cells work. Unfortunately, the index covers only half of the terms so whenever you don't remember what a word stands for, you need to recall where you last saw it.
A few times one may notice that the understanding of genetics/genomics has changed since the book was published. For example, there is no longer such a thing as "non-sense DNA". Also in the epilogue, the connection between AIDS infecting humans and endangered species is very likely simply wrong.
A few times one may notice that the understanding of genetics/genomics has changed since the book was published. For example, there is no longer such a thing as "non-sense DNA". Also in the epilogue, the connection between AIDS infecting humans and endangered species is very likely simply wrong.
January 11, 2009
Though a reader of this book would understand it better if they had a little background or baisic knowledge of evolution and microbiology, it isn't absalutely needed to grasp the general concept Mr. Clark puts forward (which is that DNA reproduces because it wants to survive, sex was used as a way to strengthen DNA, once the DNA is passed on via conjugation the other somatic cells no longer need will either 1. die from environmental causes or 2. die via apoptosis which has been programed into the cell's DNA)
A great balance of science and philosophy, tackling such hard questions of what is life/death and how did it come into being? I am left with more questions after reading this book, but as the 21st century moves on we are hopeful that the studies of DNA show us more and more of our core selves.
July 3, 2021
4.5
There's a lot of mind-blowingly cool stuff in this book, and it's explained with masterful clarity and concision. Incidentally, I've been meaning to study cardiology, and the way he uses the incident of the heart attack throughout the book to explore its cellular, medical, legal and philosophic dimensions felt like being given exactly what I wanted and much more. All I can say is: bravo. However, I was a bit alarmed when he began to (admittedly very tentatively) speculate that higher-order stuff of the mind like poetry or concepts of the afterlife might be a function of junk DNA, since it seems to me this is a cartoonishly reductionistic mindset. I'd be fine if he described these phenomena as emergent spandrels and moved on from there; maybe they serve a reproductive advantage or they don't, but it seems plainly wrong to me to suggest that they're directly specified in the polynucleotide chains of germ cells.
Also, despite his admirably balanced and nuanced take on the legality of death, his concluding remarks seem rushed. For example, take his dichotomy of human activity and 'nature':
"Medicine in the twentieth century has already enabled us to alter the composition of the human gene pool by keeping alive through reproductive age people who, in a more natural environment, would have died of genetic disease."
I kinda know what he means by this; our species has mitigated risk and thereby reduced selective pressures, but this is no more 'unnatural' than beehives serving the interest of bees. What's especially confusing is that earlier on, he talks about how unsettling it is to think that our whole existence is fundamentally based on a DNA molecule, which means that our lives, and therefore our mortality, is a malleable concept contingent on chemical details.
And yet his concluding remark suggests that nature's final decree is that our somatic existence is excess baggage, even though it's abundantly clear that humans have have managed to functionally prioritize it time and again. I remember a story about Steven Pinker being asked why he doesn't want kids, since it goes against what his genes want: he replied with something like 'to hell with what my genes want". If that's not a clear L for the germ cells I don't know what is.
It's obviously outside the scope of his book to fully explain all culture and pscyhology but it would have been nice to have the same elegance and precision in the conclusion that was demonstrated throughout the rest of the book.
There's a lot of mind-blowingly cool stuff in this book, and it's explained with masterful clarity and concision. Incidentally, I've been meaning to study cardiology, and the way he uses the incident of the heart attack throughout the book to explore its cellular, medical, legal and philosophic dimensions felt like being given exactly what I wanted and much more. All I can say is: bravo. However, I was a bit alarmed when he began to (admittedly very tentatively) speculate that higher-order stuff of the mind like poetry or concepts of the afterlife might be a function of junk DNA, since it seems to me this is a cartoonishly reductionistic mindset. I'd be fine if he described these phenomena as emergent spandrels and moved on from there; maybe they serve a reproductive advantage or they don't, but it seems plainly wrong to me to suggest that they're directly specified in the polynucleotide chains of germ cells.
Also, despite his admirably balanced and nuanced take on the legality of death, his concluding remarks seem rushed. For example, take his dichotomy of human activity and 'nature':
"Medicine in the twentieth century has already enabled us to alter the composition of the human gene pool by keeping alive through reproductive age people who, in a more natural environment, would have died of genetic disease."
I kinda know what he means by this; our species has mitigated risk and thereby reduced selective pressures, but this is no more 'unnatural' than beehives serving the interest of bees. What's especially confusing is that earlier on, he talks about how unsettling it is to think that our whole existence is fundamentally based on a DNA molecule, which means that our lives, and therefore our mortality, is a malleable concept contingent on chemical details.
And yet his concluding remark suggests that nature's final decree is that our somatic existence is excess baggage, even though it's abundantly clear that humans have have managed to functionally prioritize it time and again. I remember a story about Steven Pinker being asked why he doesn't want kids, since it goes against what his genes want: he replied with something like 'to hell with what my genes want". If that's not a clear L for the germ cells I don't know what is.
It's obviously outside the scope of his book to fully explain all culture and pscyhology but it would have been nice to have the same elegance and precision in the conclusion that was demonstrated throughout the rest of the book.
August 1, 2013
"Death is not inextricably intertwined with the definition of life."
I discovered this book by accident a few days ago. I read it in two days only, but I think it will stick with me for a long time. It is an extremely well-written book, one that manages to explain complicated biological concepts like apoptopsis in a very intuitive way.
At the same time, it's more than just a biology book, since talking about death involves delicate aspects such as the many dilemmas regarding the persistent vegetative state, which concern, more than just those affected directly, society itself.
The book also delivers what the title promises, a plausible theory regarding the connection of sexual reproduction and death. Together with Dawkins's Selfish Gene, it is a great read for those who are not afraid of facing what we living things really are.
I discovered this book by accident a few days ago. I read it in two days only, but I think it will stick with me for a long time. It is an extremely well-written book, one that manages to explain complicated biological concepts like apoptopsis in a very intuitive way.
At the same time, it's more than just a biology book, since talking about death involves delicate aspects such as the many dilemmas regarding the persistent vegetative state, which concern, more than just those affected directly, society itself.
The book also delivers what the title promises, a plausible theory regarding the connection of sexual reproduction and death. Together with Dawkins's Selfish Gene, it is a great read for those who are not afraid of facing what we living things really are.
February 22, 2024
كتاب بيولوجي يتكلم عن الموت من وجهة نظر علمية من خلال متابعة رحلة موت الخلية في الكائن الحي ،لكن الكاتب ذكر نقطة جوهرية لم يستفيض فيها في الحقيقية عميقة لحدود بعيده حول الموت والجنس،يرى أن الموت لم يظهر مع ظهور الحياة إنما ظهر الموت مع ظهور الجنس حيث اقترن الجنس والهرم بالموت.
شيء من سطور الكتاب:
▪️لم يظهر الموت على مسرح الأحداث إلا بعد مرور مليار سنة أو نحوها على ظهور الحياة الأولى
▪️الدراسات التطويرية للكائنات وحيدة الخلية تشير إلى أن هرم الخلية وموتها ليس صفتين إجباريتين للحياة على سطح الارض ولعل الموت الإجباري نتيجة الهرم لم يظهر إلا بعد أكثر من مليار سنه بعد بدء الحياة على سطح الأرض ويبدو أن هذه الصيغة من الموت قد نشأ في الوقت ذاته الذي بدأت فيه الخلايا تجربة الجنس بالترابط مع التكاثر وربما كان ذلك هو الفقدان النهائي للطهارة
▪️لم يظهر الموت والحياة سوياً هذه إحدى أهم العبارات العميقة في كل البيولوجيا إن الموت ليس متضافراً مع تعريف الحياة بشكل لا فكاك منه
▪️ظهرت الكائنات وحيدة الخلية عندما كان الغلاف الجوي للأرض خالياً إلى حد كبير من الأكسجين ،الزيادة التدريجية في تركيز الأكسجين في الغلاف الجوي كان حدثاً تطورياً ذا أبعاد خطيرة
▪️علم الموت هو دراسة الموت وعمليته وهو فرع من فروع الطب يركز على المناحي النفسية والإجتماعية إلا أنه لايثير الأسئلة حول طبيعة الموت بالذات
▪️مامن أحد أعار الإنتباه لكيفية موت الخلايا ربما كان مفهوماً أن الاحيائيين في المقام الأول قد فتنهم كيف تعيش الخلية وكيف تعمل وكيف تتوالد بيد أن موت الخلية قد يكون فاتناً ومعقداً في آن واحد لقد تبين أن ثمة طريق آخر لموت الخلية طريقا مختلفاً جداً وهو ليس نتيجة حادث أو سوء طالع بل مبرمج في الخلايا وينشط تحت ظروف خاصة جداً وقد قاد اكتشاف ذلك إلى خلق ميدان جديد من البحث "موت الخلية المبرمج"
▪️إن فكرة كون الفناء برنامجاً نوعياً مضبوطا جينياً هي فكره هامة
▪️من المفيد تعريف الموت ليس بناء على اعتبارات تشريحية خاصة بل كما إقترح فيتش على فقدان الوعي الغير قابل للعوده
شيء من سطور الكتاب:
▪️لم يظهر الموت على مسرح الأحداث إلا بعد مرور مليار سنة أو نحوها على ظهور الحياة الأولى
▪️الدراسات التطويرية للكائنات وحيدة الخلية تشير إلى أن هرم الخلية وموتها ليس صفتين إجباريتين للحياة على سطح الارض ولعل الموت الإجباري نتيجة الهرم لم يظهر إلا بعد أكثر من مليار سنه بعد بدء الحياة على سطح الأرض ويبدو أن هذه الصيغة من الموت قد نشأ في الوقت ذاته الذي بدأت فيه الخلايا تجربة الجنس بالترابط مع التكاثر وربما كان ذلك هو الفقدان النهائي للطهارة
▪️لم يظهر الموت والحياة سوياً هذه إحدى أهم العبارات العميقة في كل البيولوجيا إن الموت ليس متضافراً مع تعريف الحياة بشكل لا فكاك منه
▪️ظهرت الكائنات وحيدة الخلية عندما كان الغلاف الجوي للأرض خالياً إلى حد كبير من الأكسجين ،الزيادة التدريجية في تركيز الأكسجين في الغلاف الجوي كان حدثاً تطورياً ذا أبعاد خطيرة
▪️علم الموت هو دراسة الموت وعمليته وهو فرع من فروع الطب يركز على المناحي النفسية والإجتماعية إلا أنه لايثير الأسئلة حول طبيعة الموت بالذات
▪️مامن أحد أعار الإنتباه لكيفية موت الخلايا ربما كان مفهوماً أن الاحيائيين في المقام الأول قد فتنهم كيف تعيش الخلية وكيف تعمل وكيف تتوالد بيد أن موت الخلية قد يكون فاتناً ومعقداً في آن واحد لقد تبين أن ثمة طريق آخر لموت الخلية طريقا مختلفاً جداً وهو ليس نتيجة حادث أو سوء طالع بل مبرمج في الخلايا وينشط تحت ظروف خاصة جداً وقد قاد اكتشاف ذلك إلى خلق ميدان جديد من البحث "موت الخلية المبرمج"
▪️إن فكرة كون الفناء برنامجاً نوعياً مضبوطا جينياً هي فكره هامة
▪️من المفيد تعريف الموت ليس بناء على اعتبارات تشريحية خاصة بل كما إقترح فيتش على فقدان الوعي الغير قابل للعوده
March 16, 2020
I just don't know where to start. Sex and the Origins of Death presents the process by which multicellular and unicellular organisms live and die. Clark discusses the self-destructive program or apoptosis embedded in our cells and the huge role our DNA plays. When sexual reproduction first appeared, it became the dominant form for reproduction and the most successful way of transmitting our DNA for the next generations. He argues that "sex unquestionably enhances genetic variation, which is one way species are able to adapt to a changing environment ... those individuals who successfully adapt are selected for survival and further reproduction."
He goes on to say that both sex and programmed death started when single cells were the governing organisms. The book explores outstanding ideas about senescence, brain death, viruses, and the meaning of life. I highly recommend this book because of its clarity and penetrating ideas. The author successfully recounts the story of human beings not just from a biological perspective but he presents it as a tale full of tragedies, mysteries, and wonder.
He goes on to say that both sex and programmed death started when single cells were the governing organisms. The book explores outstanding ideas about senescence, brain death, viruses, and the meaning of life. I highly recommend this book because of its clarity and penetrating ideas. The author successfully recounts the story of human beings not just from a biological perspective but he presents it as a tale full of tragedies, mysteries, and wonder.
December 9, 2025
A scientific, areligious, and pseudophilosophical examination of death. Examining the relationship between sex and death was interesting, but despite attempts to make this "fun" with metaphors and stories, it still reduces one of the universe's greatest concepts to materialist biology.
The index, which tells you where to find all 19 mentions of DNA, does not have an entry for God.
The index, which tells you where to find all 19 mentions of DNA, does not have an entry for God.
October 17, 2017
This book will make teach you a lot about biology. More importantly, it will make you ask questions about what is life, what is death, and how are we going to deal with the moral questions raised by our abilities to keep the "dead" alive.
January 15, 2023
Good perspective on life!
August 19, 2023
A good discussion of life, cells, DNA, and death.
September 4, 2011
A very solid book, well-written and easy to follow even without more than middle-school level knowledge of biology.
This book is an overview of death on the cellular level: why it exists, the fact that it hasn't always existed, the two kinds of cell death, and what each one means within the context of our own body. Except for the introductory biology chapter, I knew almost nothing that this book explained to me, and in that way it was incredibly educational and satisfying. To make sure the reader wouldn't get bored with scientific chatter, the author interjects often with illustrating anecdotes, court cases concerning legal death, hypothetical patients, and mini stories about specific cells. None are irrelevant, and though some are a bit fluffy, they were easy to speed-read through and get back to the juicy stuff.
My only complaint about this book might be an unusual one for the normal reader - it wasn't quite clinical and information-packed enough for me. I read almost the entire thing (I was on page 8 up until this afternoon) without moving more than rolling over on the bed. Not a time consuming work!g
This book is an overview of death on the cellular level: why it exists, the fact that it hasn't always existed, the two kinds of cell death, and what each one means within the context of our own body. Except for the introductory biology chapter, I knew almost nothing that this book explained to me, and in that way it was incredibly educational and satisfying. To make sure the reader wouldn't get bored with scientific chatter, the author interjects often with illustrating anecdotes, court cases concerning legal death, hypothetical patients, and mini stories about specific cells. None are irrelevant, and though some are a bit fluffy, they were easy to speed-read through and get back to the juicy stuff.
My only complaint about this book might be an unusual one for the normal reader - it wasn't quite clinical and information-packed enough for me. I read almost the entire thing (I was on page 8 up until this afternoon) without moving more than rolling over on the bed. Not a time consuming work!g
July 8, 2012
[Notes transcribed from high school reading journal]
Awesome read for me. It's not crammed with scientific jargon, but explains fascinating concepts in layman's terms.
The main questions of the book are:
- On a biological level, what defines death?
- What # or which cells must die before we consider someone dead?
- Death on a microscopic, cellular level is always occurring - when does it translate to a person actually "dying"?
One of the most interesting questions posted (in my opinion) is - why is there a hierarchy of somatic cells?
Awesome read for me. It's not crammed with scientific jargon, but explains fascinating concepts in layman's terms.
The main questions of the book are:
- On a biological level, what defines death?
- What # or which cells must die before we consider someone dead?
- Death on a microscopic, cellular level is always occurring - when does it translate to a person actually "dying"?
One of the most interesting questions posted (in my opinion) is - why is there a hierarchy of somatic cells?
June 2, 2016
I would have given this book five stars but frankly I was lost a lot. This is not an easy topic to absorb. However, having said that, the findings in this book shatter your entire perception of living and life. I found the principles to be "mind-blowing" and reading this book has opened entire perceptual vistas on how I view the world,the universe, life itself, and consciousness. I will be reading this book again so that I understand all of its nuances and precepts.
November 3, 2024
this is a crazyyyy book. About cells and how / when something actually dies, from a cellular to a bigger level. Then it gets into a more philosophical perspective of how death is only necessary because of sex. If there was no reproduction we wouldn’t need to cycle through cells. Very interesting and thought provoking, more geared for a scientific reader
May 3, 2022
For what it is, it is perfect.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews