Is it better to conserve fibroblats and cells in the skin or is it better to turn over cells fater? Fibroblast are early cells in our skin that can differentiate into elastin, collagen, or glycosoaminoglycans. Fibroblasts have limited divisions. After that they go into a phase where they don't divide anymore. Recently I read alittle about Sirtuin and it raise this concern. It seemed that sirtuin prolong the life of fibroblasts by turning off unnecessary gene expressions. Thus conserve energy and keep the cells living longer? But I always thought it's good to stimulate collagen/hayluronic acid production and rapid cell turnover etc. If cells turn over faster they die faster? Is there any danger down the road to stimulate collagen production and faster cell turnover?

Could less wrinkles today would mean more wrinkles tomorrow? This gets me to think about if the products that made our skin look better now might actually hurt it with long term use? I am just very confused.

I have been using Retinol and BHA products and I like the effect. My face have more volume and glow. But now I am wondering if using peptides, vitamin C, retinol, BHA etc to stimulate collagen and more rapid cell turnover, would we "use up" the fibroblast resources since they have limited divisions? Are ingredients that stimulate collagen and ingredients that promote Sirtuin activities against eachother? Which category is better for our skin in the long run? Is one for short term gain and the other to preserve the cells longterm?

Not that I am so hung up on sirtuin, but more importantly I want to find out if it's better to preserve cell/fibroblast or better to turn over cells faster?

Does anybody have any ideas or read something that answers this dilemma?

san