Cancer Not Just “Bad Luck”

A new study refutes one published earlier this year that claimed random mutations were at the root of many tumors.

By | December 18, 2015

FLICKR, USAG HUMPHREYSOnly 10 to 30 percent of cancer cases can be attributed to random mutations in DNA, according to a study published this week (December16) in Nature. Rather, the majority of cancer cases stem from carcinogens such as toxic chemicals and radiation, the researchers found.

The results challenge those of a January Science study, which found that cell division and random mutations in DNA play a principal role in the development of cancer. A press release and many media outlets distributed the story, stating that some tissues’ higher rates of cancer are simply due to “bad luck”—meaning that avoiding things like the sun and cigarettes would not stem many instances of cancer. 

“There’s no question what’s at stake here,” John Potter of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, who was not involved in which study told Nature. “This informs whether or not we expend energy on prevention.”

After the Science paper was published earlier this year, cancer researcher Yusuf Hannun of Stony Brook University in New York was “startled,” he told Nature. The study was based on stem-cell division rates, and assumed they were independent of external factors. Using several approaches, including interrogating epidemiological data, examining mutation patterns associated with certain cancers, and developing different mathematical models, Hannun and his colleagues found that the evidence supported quite a different conclusion—that almost all cases of cancer are due to environmental exposures.

Johns Hopkins University mathematician Cristian Tomasetti, a coauthor on the Science paper, told Nature that his study was only meant to explain differences in prevalence among cancer type, not assign the cause of cancer development. “We definitely didn’t say that two-thirds of cancers are due to intrinsic factors,” Tomasetti told STAT. “It’s very clear that environmental factors affect cancer incidence.”

Hannun agreed that cancer risk is, of course, a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors. “There is still an element of luck,” he told BBC News, but “external factors play a big role.”

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You



Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo


Avatar of: James V. Kohl

James V. Kohl

Posts: 476

December 19, 2015

“There’s no question what’s at stake here,” John Potter of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, who was not involved in which study told Nature. “This informs whether or not we expend energy on prevention.”

It also informs others who are interested in Combating Evolution to Fight Disease.

For example, links from the sequencing of the octopus genome extend from the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled reproduction of microbes in ocean sediments to the biophysically constrained RNA-mediated events that link weekend evolution of the bacterial flagellum to supercoiled DNA that prevents virus-driven genomic entropy in all living genera.

It has become clear to all serious scientists that nutrient-dependent microRNAs and cell adhesion proteins are required to link atoms to ecosystems via metabolic networks and genetic networks. The networks are perturbed by viruses. The viruses steal the nutrient energy that is required for DNA repair in the context of RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions that stabilize orgnanized genomes when they are fixed in the context of the physiology of reproduction.

What we see here is another refutation of neo-Darwinian nonsense at the same time as the launch of the Precision Medicine Intiative in the USA, which will elimate any remaining neo-Darwinian theory and allow scientific progress to be made by serious scientists who understand how cell type differentiation occurs, and how it is perturbed by viruses during thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation.

A brief video helps to explain what is known to serious scientists. Mayo Clinic Researchers Find New Code That Makes Reprogramming of Cancer Cells Possible 

Popular Now

  1. A Newly Identified Species Represents Its Own Eukaryotic Lineage
  2. Telomere Length and Childhood Stress Don’t Always Correlate
  3. Optogenetic Therapies Move Closer to Clinical Use
  4. Research Links Gut Health to Neurodegeneration
    The Nutshell Research Links Gut Health to Neurodegeneration

    Rodent studies presented at the Society for Neuroscience meeting this week tie pathologies in the gastrointestinal tract or microbiome composition with Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases.