Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's a certain amount of truth to the OP's idea. For example, breast cancer is very common, and the older women get, the more common it becomes (aging creates changes in the cells). I was diagnosed with breast cancer at 39. Up until just a few years ago, this would have been dismissed as just bad luck. I did not have any obvious risk factors and was otherwise perfectly healthy, nothing in the least out of the ordinary about my lifestyle as compared to the 99% of 39-year-olds who do not get breast cancer.
However, thanks to all the money that has been thrown at breast cancer research, there are now several tests which can pinpoint rare genetic mutations which predispose a person. Lucky me, I turned out to have two of them. Why did I get cancer at 39? It was genetic.
Of course there are ALSO lifestyle and environmental factors to many cancers and people are well advised to pay attention to them. Still, the genetic component is very strong especially for those who develop cancer at a young age. And you can certainly get lung cancer without smoking, melanoma without sunbathing, and so on.
Saibot is probably the closest to right: let's face it, most people who develop cancer have had other family member with it especially certain kinds of cancer. On the other hand, yes, life style plays a role. I had cervical cancer at 24 years old: no one in our family then or since has had it. In fact cancer isn't really in our family. My husband was diagnosed with both lipo sarcoma and prostate cancer 6 years ago. Only one person in his family ever had cancer as far as we know. Of course not all of his family went to the doctors for preventive measures often either so who knows? Most of our friends who have developed cancer have had it in their families, especially lung cancer and breast cancer. I don't think any of us really know how or why some of us develop it and others don't.
If eating right and making good life style choices makes you feel like you are protecting yourself from the big C, go ahead and continue to do what is working. On the other hand, for those who feel live and let live works, that is ok as well.
Coming back to add that although my breast cancer was proven to be genetic in origin, and I have two identifiable pathogenic mutations, there is very little breast cancer in my large, extended family. I have three older sisters who are now 50 to 66 years old--no breast cancer. I have nieces in their 40s--no cancer. My aunts and grandmothers did not have cancer. The only other family members who have had breast cancer are my mother, who got it in her 70s (almost certainly as a result of being given too much estrogen for far too long a time, to treat another condition); and a cousin who was diagnosed at 46 and, unfortunately, died of the disease.
So while it is true that in "familial cancer" one can often find a cluster of relatives with the same disease, it is also the case that genes are funny things. They can skip generations and whole branches of the family tree, and yet still be inherited by a few "unlucky" ones.
There's a certain amount of truth to the OP's idea. For example, breast cancer is very common, and the older women get, the more common it becomes (aging creates changes in the cells). I was diagnosed with breast cancer at 39. Up until just a few years ago, this would have been dismissed as just bad luck.
The older we get, the higher the incidence becomes of being diagnosed with ANY type of cancer. As cells age, the chance for mutation is greater. That's been a known fact for many years.
I second the recommendation of The Emperor of All Maladies, but I read the book by Siddhartha Mukherjee (have not seen the adapted show). It's fascinating, written by an oncologist who interweaves stories about his patients as he discusses the history of cancer back to 2,000 B.C.
I have an a relative right now with lung cancer and she's never smoked a cigarette in her life, or lived with anyone who smoked.
Radon is the 2nd leading cause of lung cancer after smoking. You have to be exposed to it for a long time, at relatively high levels, for it to increase your odds of lung cancer significantly.
Saibot is probably the closest to right: let's face it, most people who develop cancer have had other family member with it especially certain kinds of cancer. On the other hand, yes, life style plays a role. I had cervical cancer at 24 years old: no one in our family then or since has had it. In fact cancer isn't really in our family. My husband was diagnosed with both lipo sarcoma and prostate cancer 6 years ago. Only one person in his family ever had cancer as far as we know. Of course not all of his family went to the doctors for preventive measures often either so who knows? Most of our friends who have developed cancer have had it in their families, especially lung cancer and breast cancer. I don't think any of us really know how or why some of us develop it and others don't.
If eating right and making good life style choices makes you feel like you are protecting yourself from the big C, go ahead and continue to do what is working. On the other hand, for those who feel live and let live works, that is ok as well.
Genetic and inherited are not the same thing.
Overall, 5 to 10% of cancers are due to inherited genes. That means that most people with cancer do not have a family history of it:
Cervical cancer is most often due to HPV infection, so a family history would not be expected. If multiple women in a family have it, that just means they have been exposed to certain strains of HPV. If multiple family members have lung cancer, it is most likely because they all smoked or lived with a smoker.
Cancers not due to inherited genes are caused by something that alters the DNA of a cell and changes the way it multiplies. That can be radiation (melanoma, for example), viral infection (like HPV), or chemicals (tobacco).
Those who develop cancer due to exposure to a known carcinogen (such as tobacco) may have genes that increase their risk:
The older we get, the higher the incidence becomes of being diagnosed with ANY type of cancer. As cells age, the chance for mutation is greater. That's been a known fact for many years.
I second the recommendation of The Emperor of All Maladies, but I read the book by Siddhartha Mukherjee (have not seen the adapted show). It's fascinating, written by an oncologist who interweaves stories about his patients as he discusses the history of cancer back to 2,000 B.C.
the older we get the more likely we will be diagnosed with one of many illnesses. As my good friends doctor told her: the majority of us will die of heart trouble,, cancer or a stroke. The older we get,, the more likely one or more will hit us.
Cervical cancer is most often due to HPV infection, so a family history would not be expected. If multiple women in a family have it, that just means they have been exposed to certain strains of HPV. If multiple family members have lung cancer, it is most likely because they all smoked or lived with a smoker.
Cancers not due to inherited genes are caused by something that alters the DNA of a cell and changes the way it multiplies. That can be radiation (melanoma, for example), viral infection (like HPV), or chemicals (tobacco).
Those who develop cancer due to exposure to a known carcinogen (such as tobacco) may have genes that increase their risk:
One of my doctors, who is a surgical oncologist, believes that more than 5 to 10% of cancers are linked to inherited genes. There has just not been enough research yet to identify many of them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.