In 2015, Cristian Tomasetti mathematician and geneticist cancer Bert Vogelstein, both University Johns Hopkins of Baltimore (United States), sought to give an answer to what occurs with cancer. So far all fingers pointed to environmental agents and, to a lesser extent, to hereditary factors. But these scientists in Baltimore found a compelling reason in the ‘bad luck’, i.e. on random mutations that arise during replication of DNA in normal, non-cancerous stem cells, a cause that placed far ahead of aforementioned hereditary or lifestyle-related factors. Or at least that thought, while media and the own international agency for research of the Cancer were in disagreement with this approach, published in the journal Science.
Despite the fact that a large percentage of cancers not can be avoided, since they are due to an error in the replication of cells, the scientists insist not to forget the importance of prevention
Two years later, those same researchers they again affect that conclusion, and do so by presenting a macroestudio about the relationship between the number of divisions of normal stem cells and the risk of cancer. To do so, they have used over 400 databases with information from a total of 17 types of cancer in 69 countries around the world. The conclusion? They were again a high percentage of cancers arising from errors in replication of DNA, regardless of what outside the country, or genetic; and environmental issues in particular, two-thirds of the cancers of the half of the population of the world that has suffered from this disease.
According to Tomasetti and Vogelstein, it was necessary to explain the contribution of each of the three potential sources of mutations (hereditary, environmental, and random errors during replication) to any type of cancer; as well as taking a much larger sample, both in number and in type and risk factors, to the of the first study, which was limited to United States, and only some types of tumors. New review covers data of 4,800 million.
Despite the random, the cancer prevention is vital
For the authors of this research, the inclusion of the errors of DNA replication as the third contributor to cancer, is not intended to downplay having primary prevention, they thus want to that he is can better understand the disease, from the perspective that not all cancers can be prevented preventing environmental risk factors , or knowing the potential genetic risks.
That Yes, both experts want to make it clear that primary prevention remains paramount for a very high percentage of tumors through a healthy lifestyle and the avoidance of carcinogens. (E) affect that although 66% of cancers are preventable, mostly itself can be improved by treatment with an early diagnosis, so we urge health focus on secondary prevention.