HonCode

Go Back   HER2 Support Group Forums > her2group
Register Gallery FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 08-18-2015, 05:53 AM   #1
Lani
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,778
Arrow "why did I get breast cancer" starting to be answered & it seems to be 80% bad luck

(the remainder being due to the environment & genetic predisposition) ALTHOUGH I would interpret this differently pointing out it may be that as a bad environment, radiation exposure, or genes which make repair of environmental damage harder or the immune system less robust , etc it takes the combined with 'BAD LUCK increases the likelihood of cancer and until we recognize all of the environmental and genetic causes of increased risk we canno put numbers on these grouos of those more or less likely to be affected.

I added an excerpt from an an editotial/commentary whose conclusions each and every one of you are equally entitled to comment on...


ABSTRACT: Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions
[Sciencee]
Some tissue types give rise to human cancers millions of times more often than other tissue types. Although this has been recognized for more than a century, it has never been explained. Here, we show that the lifetime risk of cancers of many different types is strongly correlated (0.81) with the total number of divisions of the normal self-renewing cells maintaining that tissue’s homeostasis. These results suggest that only a third of the variation in cancer risk among tissues is attributable to environmental factors or inherited predispositions. The majority is due to “bad luck,” that is, random mutations arising during DNA replication in normal, noncancerous stem cells. This is important not only for understanding the disease but also for designing strategies to limit the mortality it causes.

OPEN ACCESS: COMMENTARY: The Implications of "Random Chance" in Cancer Genesis
[JAMA Oncology]
The way to address this is to reconcile the 2 views: bad luck among the stem cells does not imply that the cancer, or the life it affects, has no meaning. The process may be random, but the meaning is in the life and not the disease process. The meaning is in the cherished families, friends, and life’s work left behind. Certainly, we should heed the lessons of epidemiology with regard to behaviors, but let us lift the burden of cancer diagnosis and survivorship from our patients’ shoulders. Cancer is an intricate and complicated biological process. People do not die from it because they are weak soldiers.

Let us advise wariness in the face of societal messages that demand extremes of diet, weight, intake of natural or unnatural substances, exercise, attitude, and an avoidance of stress—whatever that means. Perhaps one day some of these factors will be linked to a reduction in DNA transcription errors—or just as likely, an increase in them. In the meantime, abjure the colonic enemas.

It is perfectly fine for cancer in the abstract to be stochastic; but cancer in the individual should not be deprived of meaning. We need not reject the randomness of mutation-caused cancer, if that is where the science leads, but we can still believe in the deep meaningfulness of the cancer-affected life.
Lani is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright HER2 Support Group 2007 - 2021
free webpage hit counter