NEAT Breast Cancer Sudy.

[Dr Tony Parsons]

feel free to discuss download

[Time Traveller]

Are we any closer to prevention?
:)
Sharon

[Dr Tony Parsons]

Time Traveller said:

Are we any closer to prevention?
:)
Sharon

[Dr Tony Parsons]

Sharon,

Thats a good question. In terms of prevention that is. Screening has helped massivley in early detecyion of cource ehich means much better outcomes for sufferers. Combined MRI/CT.SPECt scanning could improve things a lto more but those techniques to use routinely are massively expensive and sad to say it comes down to health funding whether it be national funding like the NHS in the UI or private/insurance funding in the US and other countries.
The really great thing is that womens and their partners awareness is now much more attuned to breast abnormalities however small now. This isn't hypochondriac just the success of various 'wellness' campaigns, admittedly in developed countries but thats where the prevalence is too. So the moderation in recreational drugs (including alcohol and nicotine - though its the smoke thats the culprit) and attentoin to good diet and lifestyle play a massive part in this. None of us are saints though, well apart from the ones who actiually are :)

Genetic predisposition counselling has been a massive screening improvement too. i don't simply mean cytogenetic tests but observational genetics. If your female relatives mum, aunts, siblings have had or died from breast cancer the chances are you are at much higher risk also. This is merely confirmed by the testing for the presence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. It is very unusual, though not unheard of for those at high risk to have radical mastectomies prior to any indications of disease on the principle that if the affected tissue isn't there it can't be a risk. This only really happens in familes where a lot of family history of early death is recorded.
So, awareness is the best prevention at the moment. A womans own body awareness and that of her partner will be her best friend.
I should say at this point my Mum died of the disease (well the sequelae of it) and good friends have had scares and actual interventions so i do speak with some experience. I should I suppose make the standard disclaimer that whilst I work in the health related professions as a scientist I am NOT a physician and if anyone reading this has any concerns they should seek professional medical advice at the earliest opportunity. The worst thing for many women who have already died is that they died either because of denial or ignorance of the importance of small changes. That really needn't be the case now and if I only do a teeny bit to help public understanding thats a good thing but there are masses of self health groups and education sites now that help with self examination techniques. Most of us think nothing of good dental and oral hygiene on a daily basis its not as big a deal as that.
The issue of prostate cancer in men is a simlar issue but I don't want to digress from my initial purpose for posting this article. As I posted elsewhere I was at a professorial inaugural lecture this week on the human genetics of reproduction (mainly IVF and designer babies and the power now of techniques to prevent heritable diseases in those circumstances). The ethical questions such as 'saviour siblings' are rife but the inevitable question on cancer and genetic relatedness and disposition was raised of course. The answer isn't as hopeful as we might think as 1000's of genes have been implicated in many cancers but we can't control that aspect a lot now. But as complex multicellular organisms we are as much a product of our environment as our genes and the latter we can have a positive impact on.

[Time Traveller]

Top reply Tony. How at your last comment about designer beings... it got me thinking again on how and when cancer decided to become an entity... I mean has it been around as long as humans? or are we causing mutations with our lifestyles and progress, pollution? I'm pretty sure with the invention of so many chemicals and compounds into our environment... we've created this monster. Do you know of any ancient remains with signs of cancer/turmors... I'm sure there must be...

Dr Tony Parsons said:

Sharon,

Thats a good question. In terms of prevention that is. Screening has helped massivley in early detecyion of cource ehich means much better outcomes for sufferers. Combined MRI/CT.SPECt scanning could improve things a lto more but those techniques to use routinely are massively expensive and sad to say it comes down to health funding whether it be national funding like the NHS in the UI or private/insurance funding in the US and other countries.
The really great thing is that womens and their partners awareness is now much more attuned to breast abnormalities however small now. This isn't hypochondriac just the success of various 'wellness' campaigns, admittedly in developed countries but thats where the prevalence is too. So the moderation in recreational drugs (including alcohol and nicotine - though its the smoke thats the culprit) and attentoin to good diet and lifestyle play a massive part in this. None of us are saints though, well apart from the ones who actiually are :)

Genetic predisposition counselling has been a massive screening improvement too. i don't simply mean cytogenetic tests but observational genetics. If your female relatives mum, aunts, siblings have had or died from breast cancer the chances are you are at much higher risk also. This is merely confirmed by the testing for the presence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. It is very unusual, though not unheard of for those at high risk to have radical mastectomies prior to any indications of disease on the principle that if the affected tissue isn't there it can't be a risk. This only really happens in familes where a lot of family history of early death is recorded.
So, awareness is the best prevention at the moment. A womans own body awareness and that of her partner will be her best friend.
I should say at this point my Mum died of the disease (well the sequelae of it) and good friends have had scares and actual interventions so i do speak with some experience. I should I suppose make the standard disclaimer that whilst I work in the health related professions as a scientist I am NOT a physician and if anyone reading this has any concerns they should seek professional medical advice at the earliest opportunity. The worst thing for many women who have already died is that they died either because of denial or ignorance of the importance of small changes. That really needn't be the case now and if I only do a teeny bit to help public understanding thats a good thing but there are masses of self health groups and education sites now that help with self examination techniques. Most of us think nothing of good dental and oral hygiene on a daily basis its not as big a deal as that.
The issue of prostate cancer in men is a simlar issue but I don't want to digress from my initial purpose for posting this article. As I posted elsewhere I was at a professorial inaugural lecture this week on the human genetics of reproduction (mainly IVF and designer babies and the power now of techniques to prevent heritable diseases in those circumstances). The ethical questions such as 'saviour siblings' are rife but the inevitable question on cancer and genetic relatedness and disposition was raised of course. The answer isn't as hopeful as we might think as 1000's of genes have been implicated in many cancers but we can't control that aspect a lot now. But as complex multicellular organisms we are as much a product of our environment as our genes and the latter we can have a positive impact on.

[Dave Kelso-Mitchell]

Wow - this place looks interesting. Thanks for the invite