Slashdot Mirror
Cancer Is An Evolutionary Mechanism To 'Autocorrect' Our Gene Pool, Suggests Paper (sciencealert.com)
schwit1 quotes a report from ScienceAlert: Two scientists have come up with a depressing new hypothesis that attempts to explain why cancer is so hard to stop. Maybe, they suggest, cancer's not working against us. Maybe the disease is actually an evolutionary 'final checkpoint' that stops faulty DNA from being passed down to the next generation. To be clear, this is just a hypothesis. It hasn't been tested experimentally, and, more importantly, no one is suggesting that anyone should die of cancer. In fact, it's quite the opposite -- the researchers say that this line of thinking could help us to better understand the disease, and come up with more effective treatment strategies, like immunotherapy, even if a cure might not be possible. So let's step back a second here, because why are our bodies trying to kill us? The idea behind the paper is based on the fact that, in the healthy body, there are a whole range of inbuilt safeguards, or 'checkpoints,' that stop DNA mutations from being passed onto new cells. One of the most important of these checkpoints is apoptosis, or programmed cell death. Whenever DNA is damaged and can't be fixed, cells are marked for apoptosis, and are quickly digested by the immune system -- effectively 'swallowing' the problem. No mess, no fuss. But the new hypothesis suggests that when apoptosis -- and the other safeguards -- don't work like they're supposed to, cancer just might be the final 'checkpoint' that steps in and gets rid of the rogue cells before their DNA can be passed on... by, uh, killing us, and removing our genetic material from the gene pool.
of course these 'defective' genes get passed-on.. people usually have their kids before they get cancer. the only exception being the unfortunate kids who get sick young.
How does that explain post-menopausal cancers and cancer being more prevalent in individuals who are past their reproductive prime?
Most cancers occur in later (post childbearing) years? This is according to the American Cancer Society: http://www.cancer.org/acs/grou...
I think it's always good to look at an problem from different perspectives and while thinking of cancer as an evolutionary protection against passing down defective genes is interesting, I'm not sure that it's a valid hypothesis.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
This article isn't science. It's a bullshit excuse for wealthy folks to feel genetically superior. In the meantime we can show scientifically that poor communities get the short end of the stick when it comes to the environment they live in. We pollute the shit out of parts of this country and that's why people get cancer at an alarming rate. You buy cheap toys for children laden with toxic chemicals and that causes cancer. Don't even get me started about the shit in water. The fire retardants on whatever you are sitting on causes cancer. Cancer isn't a depopulation mechanism.
I believe cancer is a result of humans drastically increasing the amount of entropy in our environment and that entropy finding its way into our bodies.
You and GP are both wrong. Cancer cells don't try to kill the host. What's happening is that they're doing what cells normally do -- dividing -- but the problem is they divide too quickly and aren't as functional as normal cells. This inadvertantly kills you because whatever organ they're attached to loses its function and even fails.
Take for example, if your heart has a big lump in a major chamber; it's going to have a hard time doing its job.
Every living multicellular organism on this planet gets cancer, including plants. It's never fatal for plants though, because cancer can't metastasize without blood, and they don't have any major organs that can fail.
Cancer is basically a result of faulty DNA copying - it happens when multiple anti-cancer systems fail in a cell. That's it. Ascribing it some kind of a purpose is pure teleological fallacy. Stuff doesn't need to happen "for a reason".
I believe cancer is a result of humans drastically increasing the amount of entropy in our environment and that entropy finding its way into our bodies.
This statement contains the most convoluted misunderstanding of the laws of thermodynamics that I have ever seen.
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
If most cancers happen past reproductive age, why is there any need to "prevent" the spread of genes that won't be spread anyhow? And most forms of cancer are due to random mutations in individual cells, which won't change the genes in sperm/eggs. The few cancers that are due to genetic susceptibility (such as some forms of breast cancer) still get passed on anyhow. The hypothesis is so easily refuted that it isn't even funny.
What GP post says should be obvious. We get cancer specifically because there is no evolutionary pressure after reproduction for us to not get it.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }