HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - Viruses, Carcinogens, and Genetics

mts · 09-06-2006, 01:48 PM

I agree its in the genes also, but those genetic mutations are triggered to convert into cancer because of what?
I believe some cancers are just going to happen if that person lived in a bubble, but I also believe that carcinogens found in the air, foods and water also trigger our genes to zap out of sync and turn cancerous. Then there are the mesothelioma patients that developed lung cancer from inhaling asbestos. That was 100% an environmental cause of cancer.
You can read any health studies related to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki a-bombs and the proof is in the numbers regarding cancer stats changing dramatically after the bombs... all environmental.
Animals that ate hay that had been exposed to the Three Mile Island disaster also were contaminated and their milk was too. Very vague studies were done after the food contaminations, but similar situations were found in Japan way after the bombs. Cancer lingered on over decades past the bombs, because of the contaminated ground, water and air.
DDT did a number on many species of birds and fish in the 50's and still there are remnants of that pesticide in rivers... those critters would never have gotten cancer if not for the environmental poisons. Our parents ate fruits and veggies that were dusted with DDT- you knbow if it affects fish and fowl, it certainly affects delicate humans and their offspring.
I just returned from a Scientific/Consumer review of new imaging research that emphasized the fact that the Mammogram radiates the healthy cells with enough radiation that overtime, the chance of breast cancer becomes higher... why? Because the radiation triggered the genetic componenets of the cells to degrade and mutate to cancer cells. The statements from the majority of the scientists overwhelmingly leaned towards the obsoleteness of the mammo machine.
Can you imagine going for mammos for screening only to have the mammos themselves be the trigger to getting the cancer? Several studies have shown a measurable increase of breast cancer/or recurrance in women who get the mammos...We are dammed if we do and dammed if we don't get mammos!
So, in my humble opinion, many of us that carry the genetic traits for cancer would not have been destined to get cancer if not for the environmental factors. Its all about tolerance.
Yeah, genetics are the bullets, but the environmental triggers are the gun.

This is only my opinion...
Maria

09-06-2006, 01:48 PM	#4
mts Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Central Florida Posts: 503	I agree its in the genes also, but those genetic mutations are triggered to convert into cancer because of what? I believe some cancers are just going to happen if that person lived in a bubble, but I also believe that carcinogens found in the air, foods and water also trigger our genes to zap out of sync and turn cancerous. Then there are the mesothelioma patients that developed lung cancer from inhaling asbestos. That was 100% an environmental cause of cancer. You can read any health studies related to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki a-bombs and the proof is in the numbers regarding cancer stats changing dramatically after the bombs... all environmental. Animals that ate hay that had been exposed to the Three Mile Island disaster also were contaminated and their milk was too. Very vague studies were done after the food contaminations, but similar situations were found in Japan way after the bombs. Cancer lingered on over decades past the bombs, because of the contaminated ground, water and air. DDT did a number on many species of birds and fish in the 50's and still there are remnants of that pesticide in rivers... those critters would never have gotten cancer if not for the environmental poisons. Our parents ate fruits and veggies that were dusted with DDT- you knbow if it affects fish and fowl, it certainly affects delicate humans and their offspring. I just returned from a Scientific/Consumer review of new imaging research that emphasized the fact that the Mammogram radiates the healthy cells with enough radiation that overtime, the chance of breast cancer becomes higher... why? Because the radiation triggered the genetic componenets of the cells to degrade and mutate to cancer cells. The statements from the majority of the scientists overwhelmingly leaned towards the obsoleteness of the mammo machine. Can you imagine going for mammos for screening only to have the mammos themselves be the trigger to getting the cancer? Several studies have shown a measurable increase of breast cancer/or recurrance in women who get the mammos...We are dammed if we do and dammed if we don't get mammos! So, in my humble opinion, many of us that carry the genetic traits for cancer would not have been destined to get cancer if not for the environmental factors. Its all about tolerance. Yeah, genetics are the bullets, but the environmental triggers are the gun. This is only my opinion... Maria