I think Michael Levin does a lot of really good work, but I don’t agree with bioelectricity being at the central point of aging.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1568163724001284?via%3Dihub
Abstract:
Maintaining order at the tissue level is crucial throughout the lifespan, as failure can lead to cancer and an accumulation of molecular and cellular disorders. Perhaps, the most consistent and pervasive result of these failures is aging, which is characterized by the progressive loss of function and decline in the ability to maintain anatomical homeostasis and reproduce. This leads to organ malfunction, diseases, and ultimately death. The traditional understanding of aging is that it is caused by the accumulation of molecular and cellular damage. In this article, we propose a complementary view of aging from the perspective of endogenous bioelectricity which has not yet been integrated into aging research. We propose a view of aging as a morphostasis defect, a loss of biophysical prepattern information, encoding anatomical setpoints used for dynamic tissue and organ homeostasis. We hypothesize that this is specifically driven by abrogation of the endogenous bioelectric signaling that normally harnesses individual cell behaviors toward the creation and upkeep of complex multicellular structures in vivo. Herein, we first describe bioelectricity as the physiological software of life, and then identify and discuss the links between bioelectricity and life extension strategies and age-related diseases. We develop a bridge between aging and regeneration via bioelectric signaling that suggests a research program for healthful longevity via morphoceuticals. Finally, we discuss the broader implications of the homologies between development, aging, cancer and regeneration and how morphoceuticals can be developed for aging.