Miriam Webster Dictionary
defines “disease” as: a condition of the living animal or plant body or of one
of its parts that impairs normal functioning :
Cheryl wrote:
We could apply that definition to everyone alive,(regardless of how many
chromosomes they have) as aging causes our cells to degenerate, mutate, and
slow down or lose their normal functioning on a daily basis.

Actually the natural process of aging is viewed to be normal and hence
would not come under the definition of disease. Pre-mature aging,
however, is not considered normal.

The natural aging process of organic species is thought to be contributed
to by many factors. Within the human/animal model aging is thought to be
influenced by the stress that oxidation brings upon the cell. A cell
gets its energy needed to function properly from a process whereby
nutrients react with oxygen within the mitochondria of the cell. The
byproducts of this reaction include molecules that have a free electron,
also sometimes referred to as a free radical. Based on observations of
the activity of free electron molecules outside of the human/animal model
it can be hypothesized that these free radicals within the cell are
responsible for damage to the cell. Some believe that these free
radicals can be mopped up by anti-oxidants. Some also believe that this
process is accelerated in individuals with down syndrome due to the
overexpression of certain products within each cell as caused by the
additional 21st chromosome.

In my opinion, the tendency of some parents and professionals to classify
down syndrome as a disease is first because the cause of down syndrome
fits the definition and second, because often times maladies that are
defined as disease receive a greater scrutiny and a greater emphasis on
treatment. Often times, disorders that are termed to be syndromes are
thought of as being “fixed” and therefore untreatable.

The detriment to referring to down syndrome as a disease is that often
times, the word disease has a negative connotation, even though the
definition does not support this. As we all know, many people who do not
understand down syndrome are often fearful of it for whatever real or
imagined reason.

From a clinical standpoint, I would classify down syndrome as a disease
because the definition is met. I do not consider those that have down
syndrome to be necessarily sickly or contagious, just as I do not
consider someone with heart disease or myopia to be necessarily sickly or
contagious.

Although DS is not a disease in the sense that it could be caught or
developed after birth, however it is a congenital disease whereby the brain
and body undergoes a progressive decline as the genetic overexpression of
C21 poisons the system with super-oxide-dismutase. This produces hydrogen
peroxide in excess of that which the body can naturally assimilate.

Yes, that is indeed a theory about DS. If that was truly the case,
then why are so many children with DS born with hypotonia? Shouldn’t
the hypotonia develop as the genetic overexpression of C21 poisons
them?

The hypotonia associated with the newborn infant with DS appears to be
cerebral in nature rather than arising from the muscles themselves. So the
hypotonia is a result of the brain’s abnormal wiring, so to speak.

Again, by tradition, genetic disorders are not referred to as congenital
diseases. An example of a congential disease is toxoplasmosis or
cytomegalovirus.