One's cancer could just be bad luck

[Lsbcal]

Awhile back I was standing outside talking with our neighbor. She mentioned that she had always been so careful with her diet, so why did she get cancer? I felt bad that I didn't have a good response.

This article was quite interesting to me on that subject: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-23/sometimes-cancer-is-just-bad-luck

The researchers estimated that 66 percent of the mutations that drive cancer are from random replication errors over time; 29 percent are driven by environmental factors; and 5 percent are hereditary. Vogelstein said he expects that 66 percent figure to increase. “As people age,” he said, “their cells will divide more, and a greater fraction of the mutations will turn out to be random replication factors.”

And so go for a good diet, but don't feel guilty about this stuff or imagine you are 100% protected:

“One of the practical ramifications of this research is that we hope it will avoid people feeling guilty about their cancers,” Vogelstein said. “Those who have done what they should—all the preventative measures—and still get it, they need to understand that these cancers would have occurred, no matter what they did.”

 

[Walt34]

The surgeon who did the surgery on my arm for melanoma said they're seeing a lot more of it than in the past, in part simply because more people are living long enough to get it. In the past most of the people who would have come down with it died of something else first.

Uh, I guess that's good news....

 

[audreyh1]

Honestly, I don't know why people think they can ward off all diseases by healthy living. Some, certainly, but all?

I guess we like to think we have more control over our health than we actually do.

 

[Just_Steve]

“One of the practical ramifications of this research is that we hope it will avoid people feeling guilty about their cancers,” Vogelstein said

I have had the Big C, didn't know I was supposed to feel guilty.

 

[REWahoo]

I guess we like to think we have more control over our health than we actually do.

+1

The grim reaper will get you no matter how much you exercise or how healthy your diet. The hard fact is when your number is up, it's up.

One more example why numbers is hard.

 

[W2R]

Honestly, I don't know why people think they can ward off all diseases by healthy living. Some, certainly, but all?

I guess we like to think we have more control over our health than we actually do.

I know! It's amazing. I suppose that some people think we could live indefinitely, given healthy living practices. I don't see to many 180 year olds wandering about, though.

BTW, Walt, my mother had a very bad melanoma in her eye at age 52, and it was removed. She lived with no recurrences of melanoma to age 98, when she died of old age.

Her death had nothing to do with her lifestyle, AFAIK; growing old just happens to the best of us (if we are lucky).

 

[NW-Bound]

It's tough to prevent cancer. A healthy lifestyle may not help with cancer, but may keep one from dying early due to diabetes, high-blood pressure, strokes, liver cirrhosis, heart attack, etc... One can then get to die at an older age to cancer or Alzheimer.

 

[Dash man]

It's tough to prevent cancer. A healthy lifestyle may not help with cancer, but may keep one from dying early due to diabetes, high-blood pressure, strokes, liver cirrhosis, heart attack, etc... One can then get to die at an older age to cancer or Alzheimer.

A lot of hereditary factors for the different types of heart disease and strokes. Unhealthy living doesn't help, but don't believe you're protected either.

 

[NW-Bound]

Sure. If the odds are stacked against you, being careful may get you to 50 or 60, instead of dying really young at 40.

Back on cancer, I have read plenty about young people dying in their 20s or 30s. Some were vegetarian, so one can presume that they were very careful about their health and diet. It's very sad.

 

[harley]

Most types of cancer appear to be more likely due to DNA replication errors than environmental/behavioral or genetic. However, according to the article in Science - if you care to slog through it - lung cancer is 65% attributable to environmental factors (mostly smoking), and only 35% due to bad luck, with no genetic aspect to it at all. I doubt that will stop smokers since it was always assumed to be a probable death sentence anyway, but it's interesting to see the math behind it.

 

[Fedup]

A lot of hereditary factors for the different types of heart disease and strokes. Unhealthy living doesn't help, but don't believe you're protected either.

Not always hereditary. In my family high blood pressure is hereditary, 2 siblings started taking medicine in their early 40s, one in mid 50s, but the other two don't have anything yet. I don't know why. I might have it eventually when I get to my 60s but not in my early 40s.
Same with colon cancer, my sister has precancerous cancer, I have polyps, while the rest of my siblings never had anything. With my sister and I, I think perhaps it's due to our western diet.

 

[Fedup]

Sure. If the odds are stacked against you, being careful may get you to 50 or 60, instead of dying really young at 40.

Back on cancer, I have read plenty about young people dying in their 20s or 30s. Some were vegetarian, so one can presume that they were very careful about their health and diet. It's very sad.

I keep telling my kids vegetarian diet is not always healthy. We need fat for the brain.

 

[Fedup]

Most types of cancer appear to be more likely due to DNA replication errors than environmental/behavioral or genetic. However, according to the article in Science - if you care to slog through it - lung cancer is 65% attributable to environmental factors (mostly smoking), and only 35% due to bad luck, with no genetic aspect to it at all. I doubt that will stop smokers since it was always assumed to be a probable death sentence anyway, but it's interesting to see the math behind it.

I agree, same with people who drink a lot of alcohol. You might till your odds if you smoke and drink.

 

[audreyh1]

A lot of hereditary factors for the different types of heart disease and strokes. Unhealthy living doesn't help, but don't believe you're protected either.

Agreed. Genetics play a huge role. And then there's tough luck.

And even though many diseases are called "lifestyle" or "western" diseases, by comparing first world to third world and/or historical populations, and certain diseases rate rise corresponds to things like incidence of obesity in the US rising. That's not the only factor for an individual.

Plenty of skinny people develop diabetes II, so obesity, for example, is not the only cause - in fact, it could well be one of the symptoms. Traditional/conventional Western Medicine is still way behind in understanding the true cause and how to treat these diseases. In fact, you could say that western medicine is often making the situation worse, by pushing patients towards treatments that only work for a limited number of patients. For example, insisting that certain diets must by followed (as a dietician has recommended), when recent studies indicate that those likely aren't valid approaches.

Individuals can easily be trapped into thinking they are eating a healthy diet, when in fact they are making themselves sick doing so.

Western doctors don't learn nutrition in medical school even though "lifestyle diseases" probably dominate what non-surgeons treat, and limit themselves to drug management, while sending patients off to a dietitian if they think diet needs to be managed, and they are then out of that critical loop and don't learn anything from their patients' responses to dietary changes. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like conventional dietary science is well informed at all - but rather way behind the times and still clinging to ideas that are the result of convention and aren't substantiated by scientific study.

My point is - someone can strive to eat healthy and stay healthy, but compromise their health because they are conscientiously following bad advice.

OK - no one argues with getting adequate exercise. But exercise alone is probably insufficient.

 

[Which Roger]

One big benefit of a healthy lifestyle that is often overlooked is that if and when a disease strikes randomly, it's less likely to spell doom for a healthy person than for an unhealthy one, because the healthy person has more strength to fight it and, due to starting from a higher point healthwise, can decline a lot more than an unhealthy person and still avoid the grim reaper.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Western doctors don't learn nutrition in medical school even though "lifestyle diseases" probably dominate what non-surgeons treat, and limit themselves to drug management, while sending patients off to a dietitian if they think diet needs to be managed, and they are then out of that critical loop and don't learn anything from their patients' responses to dietary changes. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like conventional dietary science is well informed at all - but rather way behind the times and still clinging to ideas that are the result of convention and aren't substantiated by scientific study.

So maybe it's a good thing that western doctors don't learn nutrition in medical school....

 

[Fedup]

I had a fried who is a dietitian and she thinks it's ok to drink Diet Coke. Not over my dead body. The stuff that makes it diet is the real killer, not the calories.

 

[braumeister]

There is a significant contribution from sheer randomness to every outcome. It's just pointless to try taking any lessons from others' experiences.

Jeanne Calment, the oldest person on record, died at 122 and smoked until she was 117. She also drank port wine daily and consumed about a kilo (over two pounds) of chocolate a week. So much for healthy lifestyles. Would I try to emulate her routine in hopes of greater longevity? Not on your life.

 

[W2R]

There is a significant contribution from sheer randomness to every outcome. It's just pointless to try taking any lessons from others' experiences.

Jeanne Calment, the oldest person on record, died at 122 and smoked until she was 117. She also drank port wine daily and consumed about a kilo (over two pounds) of chocolate a week. So much for healthy lifestyles. Would I try to emulate her routine in hopes of greater longevity? Not on your life.

I want her genes, luck, or whatever, just for the chocolate.... Honestly I cannot even imagine being able to eat 2 pounds of chocolate a week. But (in another life) I'd love to try.

 

[Fedup]

Ah, it must be the chocolate. I need to buy some more for consumption. Dark chocolate.

 

[Walt34]

Ah, it must be the chocolate. I need to buy some more for consumption. Dark chocolate.

Here ya go:

https://www.amazon.com/Bloomer-poun...6&sr=1-1&keywords=10+pound+chocolate+bar&th=1

It's a ten pound chocolate bar. I did once eat a five pound Hershey's chocolate bar but it took a lot longer than a week. More like a month. And DW helped a little.

 

[Fedup]

I've been spoiled. My kid just brought back some delicious dark chocolate from Switzerland. I won't go for Hershey's for a while. I do love Hershey's though.

 

[audreyh1]

So maybe it's a good thing that western doctors don't learn nutrition in medical school....

Well - would be true considering the state of nutrition science so far. But perhaps nutrition science is where it is today precisely because it has not been part of doctor's curricula, and not taken as seriously as other medical studies. IMO, unless it starts being taken seriously as part of doctor's training, it probably won't ever get where it needs to be to really help treat patients.

 

[Lsbcal]

I try to get a copious amount of exercise. Plus a Mediterranean diet, plus thinking positive and happy thoughts.

But the article still says that I've not avoided 2/3 of the possibilities for cancer. Oh well.

I'm always shooting to live 2x my current age ... well at least to triple digits. My VPW simulations say the bank accounts will still be there.

 

[Fedup]

I usually transfer my stress to others, that's how I manage to be stress free. Stress kills.