I somewhat misread what you said. My apologies. I guess since the second part of your statement was vague it seemed like you were considering most cancer to be from rads. Many other agents are clearly also known such as some of the chemicals produced when lighting tobacco on fire. Some of these can adduct to DNA and ultimately produce mutations.
While inonizing radiation can damage DNA and lead to mutation and cancer, it is false that "radiation" is the major cause of cancer. It can do it at high doses, but it is very clear from many years of many thousands of studies that this is not the main cause of cancer.
I cannot comment on the article, other to say that correlation is not causation, although it is interesting. For some adult cancers we do know the cause. Smoking and lung cancer. Hepatitis and liver cancer, which is one of the world's most common cancers (anything that causes chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis can lead to it, including viruses or alcohol). H. Pylori and gastric cancer. Note that the last two are clearly linked to infections. Cervical cancer has already been commented upon.
What I wanted to add is that there is a misconception that a "weak" immune system is the problem with infection associated cancers. In fact, it is likely an overactive immune system that can drive cancer formation in the examples given above. In other words the immune system is a double edged sword that can fight infection and save your life, but can also cause damage to nearby cells while it its killing infectious agents. To kill infectious agents, it uses reactive oxygen and nitrogen chemicals that can cause DNA damage and mutation. It is true that at times the "immune surviellence" function of the immune system may help prevent cancer, but it is also true that a great majority of the worlds cancers in adults (which are much much more common than childhood cancers) are produced as a result of the immune response. So it is plausible that a childhood "benign" infection may be related to childhood cancer, although obviously a great more work needs to be done.
Slashdot Mirror
I somewhat misread what you said. My apologies. I guess since the second part of your statement was vague it seemed like you were considering most cancer to be from rads. Many other agents are clearly also known such as some of the chemicals produced when lighting tobacco on fire. Some of these can adduct to DNA and ultimately produce mutations.
While inonizing radiation can damage DNA and lead to mutation and cancer, it is false that "radiation" is the major cause of cancer. It can do it at high doses, but it is very clear from many years of many thousands of studies that this is not the main cause of cancer.
I cannot comment on the article, other to say that correlation is not causation, although it is interesting. For some adult cancers we do know the cause. Smoking and lung cancer. Hepatitis and liver cancer, which is one of the world's most common cancers (anything that causes chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis can lead to it, including viruses or alcohol). H. Pylori and gastric cancer. Note that the last two are clearly linked to infections. Cervical cancer has already been commented upon. What I wanted to add is that there is a misconception that a "weak" immune system is the problem with infection associated cancers. In fact, it is likely an overactive immune system that can drive cancer formation in the examples given above. In other words the immune system is a double edged sword that can fight infection and save your life, but can also cause damage to nearby cells while it its killing infectious agents. To kill infectious agents, it uses reactive oxygen and nitrogen chemicals that can cause DNA damage and mutation. It is true that at times the "immune surviellence" function of the immune system may help prevent cancer, but it is also true that a great majority of the worlds cancers in adults (which are much much more common than childhood cancers) are produced as a result of the immune response. So it is plausible that a childhood "benign" infection may be related to childhood cancer, although obviously a great more work needs to be done.