4 ms·
As a person who studied cancer, I am probably not this article's audience. That said, I feel the need to point out that chronic inflammation has long been know
by jszymborski 1y ago
As a person who studied cancer, I am probably not this article's audience.
That said, I feel the need to point out that chronic inflammation has long been known to be one of the roots of cancer. Chronic inflammation can be caused by a few things but common among them is the immune system.
The framing of the article, in my quick skim, felt like it was insinuating that researchers believed that cancer arises from mutations alone, and that everyone assumed carcinogens were all mutagens.
I haven't read the paper this article is describing. It seems very interesting. But the headline and the article makes it seem like some major turning point or ground shift which IMHO it is not.
- mielioort 1y agoSo auto-immune diseases ( like arthritis and allergied) and chronic untreated diseases like lyme are the main suspects now?
- luciferin 1y agoI don't know about main suspect, but autoimmune disease has been known for a long time to increase your risk of cancer. I have Celiac disease, so an increased risk of stomache, intestinal and bowel cancer. Honestly, this article is kind of worrying for me, personally. I have many symptoms after two years of treatment with diet alone. Further evidence may eventually show treatment with antibiotics or steroids for people like me may lower more risks then it raises.
- baby 1y agoAs someone with both that sucks
- laughing_man 1y agoCancer has many different, simultaneous causes. That's why when people say "x causes cancer" what they mean is x (whatever it is) raises your odds of getting cancer by a measurable degree.
- baxtr 1y agoI don’t want to defend how they report. But for someone who hasn’t been involved in the field, something that’s widely accepted and well-known for a long time can seem “very new” to them.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- JohnHaugeland 1y agothat sentence starts “in the popular imagination”
- manmal 1y agoAnd are we sure inflammation is the root cause and not just a bystander? Couldn’t it be pathogens that are kept in check by inflammation, which then also cause cancer to develop? HPV and papillomas, and H. pylori and stomach cancer have been such findings. Apparently, sometimes cancer cells contain fungal DNA (not well studied though, could be contaminants as well). Edited the last sentence.
- dillydogg 1y agoProbably not, given the multiple conditions that are "sterile" inflammation that lead to neoplasms. Consider the example of asbestos; the particles lodge in the lungs which lead to a robust immune response that attempts to clear it, which has a strong association with the development of lung neoplasms. I'm not aware that the link between the inflammation and the development of the neoplasm is well understood. Autoimmune diseases and chronic GERD are other examples.
- manmal 1y agoCan you provide more context on what question you were addressing? I‘m not sure what point you are making here.
- dillydogg 1y ago>Couldn’t it be pathogens that are kept in check by inflammation, which then also cause cancer to develop? In reference to this question. These conditions with prolonged inflammation lead to cancer in the absence of a primary pathogen. >Apparently, sometimes cancer cells contain fungal DNA (not well studied though, could be contaminants as well). In reference to this, if you are referring to the "tumor microbiome" hypothesis, it has been thoroughly debunked. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mbio.01607-23 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mbio.01607-23
- manmal 1y ago> in the absence of a primary pathogen And how can absence of a pathogen be determined, in vivo? That sounds a bit overconfident in current tools, no? H. pylori apparently can hide inside Candida cells. Biofilm lets pathogens prosper while hiding them from diagnosis. Who knows what else is going on. I don’t think the microbiome hypothesis can be rejected at this point. Studies were flawed, yes. I personally am not a fan of the status-quo-ism that comments such as yours express. There’s so much that’s not explored here.
- ashleyn 1y agoWhat is the "80% cause" of chronic inflammation most people should be aware of, so that people may be able to make lifestyle changes to reduce it? What blood tests can I have ordered to measure it?
- nradov 1y agoExcess adipose tissue is a major source of chronic inflammation.
- Maxion 1y agoYou don't really need blood tests. Just eat a varied diet, low in ultra processed foods (preferrably none). Limit refined carbs/sugars, excercise regularly, spend time in nature, and don't live in built-up areas with lots of polution. Avoid fragrances, PFAS/PFOA, pftalates and the like.
- user____name 1y agoChronic stress is a major one.