This sort of adaptivism has got to go. First of all, nothing is there for any reason; it just is. Evolution is an ad hoc process where things happen because they need to, and they happen based on expediency. There are many facets of life that escape adaptive constraint - selection has a limited reach.<p>This comment supposes that aging protects cells against cancer; I think this presumption is based on the antitumor properties of telomeres, which impose the &#x27;Hayflick limit&#x27; on cellular division.<p>It is presumed by humans that this mechanism may have some adaptive role in tumor suppression. However: this is not why it appeared (all eukaryotes have telomeres, even unicellular ones), so any antitumor properties are an ancillary benefit.<p>It is incorrect to assume it impute reason to evolution. It seems highly likely that aging rests close to the border of selective influence, and it is highly presumptive to imagine it is governed by consequence.