Subject: More post-archive search queries re red blood cells

1) How exactly do we know that rbcs can live for up to 180 days in the 
circulation?

2) Now, I understand that mammalian rbcs loose their nuclei, mitochondria and 
other organelles in order to become fully functioning in the blood system.  
However, what I am finding very hard to accept is that they do not have any DNA 
or any facility to synthesise proteins once they are cruising the blood 
system.  Surely if they can keep going for up to 180 days, respiring and 
controlling what seem to be pretty complex biochemical processes, they MUST 
need to generate proteins during this time?  They are living, are they not?  
How can they control all of their life processes without any DNA at all? 

3) I also understand that anucleated red blood cells are more advanced in 
evolutionary terms.  The absence of a nucleus makes the rbc more flexible and 
it thus is more efficient in squeezing its way into narrow capillaries.  Less 
cell parts also makes room for packaging of even more haemoglobin.  Mammals 
exhibit this higher form of rbc - with the exception of the camel, apparently.  
What?  Well how does the camel manage then?  What about its fine capillaries 
and delivery of oxygen?     

4) Is there an electronmicrograph of the interior of a red blood cell in 
existence?  Or even a diagrammatic representation available?  What DO they look 
like inside!?

Re: More post-archive search queries re red blood cells