• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Most cancers caused by natural mutations

Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
1,424 (0.59/day)
System Name octo1
Processor dual Xeon 2687W ES
Motherboard Supermicro
Cooling dual Noctua NH-D14
Memory generic ECC reg
Video Card(s) 2 HD7950
Storage generic
Case Rosewill Thor
That seems to be the message of a new and very controversial study.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/random-mutations-play-large-role-cancer-study-finds

The gist of the article is that there is a strong correlation between tissues and organs that have a high rate of cell division and cancer. They estimate that about 2/3 of all cancers result from normal mutations that accumulate during the division of stem cells. That leaves about 1/3 that result from environmental and other factors.

But many scientists contest this new study especially since it seems to negate public safety and education efforts. But as the article concludes.

In fact, Tomasetti and Vogelstein stress that their findings are compatible with cancer-prevention recommendations. Avoiding smoking, tanning beds, obesity and other known carcinogens can prevent the “environmental” mutations that combine with inherited and random mutations to tip cells into cancer. Without those final straws loaded from environmental exposures, tumors may be averted or greatly delayed.
emphasis added.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
3,505 (0.79/day)
I sort of agree. I say "sort of" because I have nothing concrete to back my theory up.

To me, cancer is like certain groups of cells calling quits and decide to become something else and therefore going against the norm.

Old age triggers this most often. Some form of mutation is harmless (like thick hairs appearing where they shouldn't be).
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
5,640 (1.66/day)
Location
Florida
System Name natr0n-PC
Processor Various - Ryzen 3600XT & 3700X
Motherboard Various - Aorus B450M
Cooling Various - Assassin 3
Memory Various - TEAM VULCAN 32GB DDR4 4000
Video Card(s) Various - EVGA 1660ti
Storage Various
Display(s) Various AOC 27G2 IPS 144Hz
Case Various
Audio Device(s) Various
Power Supply Various
Software XP/7/8.1/10
Benchmark Scores http://valid.x86.fr/79kuh6
I though everyone knew this. You cant cure something that's unpredictable by nature.
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
484 (0.20/day)
Location
Fort Sill, OK
Processor Intel 7700K 5.1Ghz (Intel advised me not to OC this CPU)
Motherboard Asus Maximus IX Code
Cooling Corsair Hydro H115i Platinum
Memory 48GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4 3200 Dual Channel (2x16 & 2x8)
Video Card(s) nVIDIA Titan XP (Overclocks like a champ but stock performance is enough)
Storage Intel 760p 2280 2TB
Display(s) MSI Optix MPG27CQ Black 27" 1ms 144hz
Case Thermaltake View 71
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 1000 Platinum2
Mouse Corsair M65 Pro (not recommded, I am on my second mouse with same defect)
Software Windows 10 Enterprise 1803
Benchmark Scores Yes I am Intel fanboy that is my benchmark score.
I though everyone knew this. You cant cure something that's unpredictable by nature.

Given enough time and research it is possible to cure. I am pretty sure they said same thing "You cant cure something that's unpredictable by nature." about plenty of illnesses 100 years ago.
 

Easy Rhino

Linux Advocate
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
14,958 (2.82/day)
Location
Mid-Atlantic
System Name Desktop
Processor i5 7500 Kaby Lake
Motherboard AsRock MicroATX Z170M Extreme4
Cooling Stock
Memory 2x 16 Gb Gskill Ripjaws 2400
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 5700
Storage Samsung 970 EVO 1 TB m.2 NVMe + Samsung 860 EVO 2 TB SATA3 SSD
Display(s) LG 34GK950F-B 34" 21:9 Ultragear WQHD Nano IPS Curved Gaming Monitor with Radeon FreeSync 2
Case Corsair Carbide 400C
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply Seasonic SSR-650GD Flagship Prime Series 650W Gold
Mouse Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum
Keyboard Corsair K63 Wireless
Software Windows 10
well this makes sense to me. if environmental factors were higher then everybody would seem to have cancer which just isn't true.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
13,791 (2.27/day)
It makes sense that if you have many divisions of cells, there will be errors that later manifest in form of cancer or tumors. The fact we've extended our average life expectency from roughly 30 years to what, 75-ish means that as we go past our "ancient" life expectancy, more and more errors happen. And we are getting good at treating those as well now...
 

the54thvoid

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
9,008 (2.16/day)
Location
Glasgow - home of formal profanity
System Name Newer Ho'Ryzen
Processor Ryzen 3700X
Motherboard Asus Crosshair VI Hero
Cooling TR Le Grand Macho
Memory 16Gb G.Skill 3200 RGB
Video Card(s) RTX 2080ti MSI Duke @2Ghz ish
Storage Samsumg 960 Pro m2. 512Gb
Display(s) LG 32" 165Hz 1440p GSYNC
Case Lian Li PC-V33WX
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply Seasonic Prime TItanium 850
Software W10
Benchmark Scores Look, it's a Ryzen on air........ What's the point?
http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk...the-hype-10-persistent-cancer-myths-debunked/

Number one, the biggest risk is age. It's always been known that cancer just happens. It's just modern media reporting that obfuscates that not through malice but ignorance.
However, those environmental factors play significant roles in increasing the prevalence of cancer. Imagine the decreased cost of medical expenses and increase in life if people took more responsibility.
If the environmental factors are only a third, that's still a huge positive to work on.
 
Top