I just wanted to relay some interesting things that I learned from reading it. For small facts, I'll provide direct quotes, and for bigger ideas I'll give my own synopsis. The themes were
- Epidemiology, environmental risks and prevention
- Latest developments in clinical cancer research
- A new approach to understanding the cancer process (which was the section Mike highlighted for me)
- Complementary medicine
- Economic aspects of cancer care in the NHS
Alright, this isn't going to be too well structured--I'm just going to throw out what really jumps out at me.
"aflatoxin B1 (a mycotoxin from the fungus Aspergillus and one of the most carcinogenic compounds known)" is a leading cause of liver cancer. Also, weird/terrifying/wouldn't have thought that a fungus was one of the worst compounds--I thought the worst ones were all man made or at least modified
later in that section, it highlighted how arsenic was a major cause of cancer in the developing world, highlighting Bangladesh as an example, and how asbestos still remains a problem.
"natural radioactivity and problems caused by the increased use of medical diagnostics and treatment, especially in the USA where 50% of an individual's dose of ionising radiation is from this source" This will only bolster my reluctance to go to the ER or doctor next time I break a bone at rugby, and I know what's happened to me.
There is a small mention here of how messing with our livestock (their example is recombinant bovine growth hormone) may increase the susceptibility of people to develop a cancer (but as I understand it, the person already had to have some natural risk of developing breast or prostate cancer anyway, as these are the two main hormone driven cancers).
Findings reported from the European Prospective Investigations into Cancer and Nutrition:
- finally found a biochemical link between obesity and cancer (high levels of C-peptide in obese postmenopausal women increases risk of breast cancer)
- Type 2 diabetes appeared to protect against prostate cancer
- "there was a positive relationship between height and the development of colorectal cancer in men, possibly due ot increased growth factor exposure" (so me and my brother are screwed).
A breakthrough in the understanding of metastatic cancer:
"the electrical signals (ion channels) in cancer cells change with increasing metastatic potential, such that the aggressive cells become 'excitable'. This led to the cellular excitability (CELEX) hypothesis--proposing the hyperactivity of metastatic tumour cells as being due to a combination of increased expression of voltage-gated sodium channels (VGSCs) and concomitant decreased expression of voltage-gated potassium channels (VGPCs). Indeed, up-regulation of VGSCs was now known to occur in many cancers (including breast, prostate, and colon). Importantly, in breast cancer cells, the VGSC was found to be in its embryonic splice form (which would not be expected to be expressed in the rest of the adult body), enabling the development of tumor-specific drugs. Further studies showed that blocking the VGSC activity reduced the cancer cells' invasiveness. Professor Djamgoz also showed that several natural, including dietary products, with known anti-cancer properties, including resveratrol and omega-3 fish oils, inhibited VGSC activity."
Lastly, I'm glad to see there was a plug from Dr Gunther Spahn, medical director of the centre for integrative medicine and oncology in Germany, said that "the strongest drug for breast cancer is exercise."
No comments:
Post a Comment