Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

It's not a toomah at all!

Reading this, is this research only for lung cancer or all cancers? Specifically:

Around one in every 600,000 cells in the lungs of a 50-year-old already contains potentially cancerous mutations. These are acquired as we age but appear completely healthy until they are activated by the chemical alarm and become cancerous. Crucially, the researchers were able to stop cancers forming in mice exposed to air pollution by using a drug that blocks the alarm signal.

Around one in every 600,000 cells in the lungs of a 50-year-old already contains potentially cancerous mutations. These are acquired as we age but appear completely healthy until they are activated by the chemical alarm and become cancerous. Crucially, the researchers were able to stop cancers forming in mice exposed to air pollution by using a drug that blocks the alarm signal.

Even the aricle keeps mentioning lung cancer and air pollution, but no other cancers.

is this research only for lung cancer or all cancers?

is this research only for lung cancer or all cancers?

That's not really the correct question. The research is only IN lung cancer. Additional studies would need to be done if the results were found to be similar in other forms of cancer. And very likely the answer is maybe some but not all. Cancer is a complex group of diseases that have all kinds of causes, or at least thought to be of vastly different causes.

The correct question would be, what other cancers might this relate to if any? As some cancers share somewhat similar processes of evolution before they arrive. Perhaps if other cancers share the same process as lung cancer, they would be candidates for checking.

That's not really the correct question. The research is only IN lung cancer.

That's not really the correct question. The research is only IN lung cancer.

Not sure how using "in" instead of "for" makes much difference to the meaning. Clearly the answer to his question is "yes", if it's only "concerning" (to use another interchangeable word) lung cancer.

No. But you obviously are; a good Slashdot reader, you didn't even read the summary.

One unfortunate effect of early stage cancers (even when no symptoms are evident) is the inability to read and comprehend text displayed on a screen. Amazingly though, one's ability to type nonsensical strings of words is often elevated to a zen like status.

One unfortunate effect of early stage cancers (even when no symptoms are evident) is the inability to read and comprehend text displayed on a screen. Amazingly though, one's ability to type nonsensical strings of words is often elevated to a zen like status.

One unfortunate effect of early stage cancers (even when no symptoms are evident) is the inability to read and comprehend text displayed on a screen. Amazingly though, one's ability to type nonsensical strings of words is often elevated to a zen like status.

Your latter statement, tends to confirm that social media is in fact a cancer.

It's certainly plausible that SOME of the "damaged DNA" is retroviruses. I can see not basis for concluding that all, or even the majority, is of that nature. It's not like copying errors are that unusual.

For the resident experts on everything here to explain why this study is completely wrong.

It's quite simple my dear boy: Lung cancer is a ridiculous liberal myth invented by the liberal elites to control you by making you not smoke good, healthy, tobacco, like God himself intends you to do. If Trump smokes, and he's 94 and not dead, unlike the socialist Queen who never smokes and just died at barely 70, doesn't that tell you all you need to know about so-called "cancer"?

Even if lung cancer existed, it's fairly obvious that a simple anti-parasitic veterinary medicine would be sufficient to kee

Well, FWIW, I heard that the "Marlboro Man" died of lung cancer several decades ago. (Perhaps they've replaced him?)

We can wait together. Might as well crack a beer and get comfortable...it won't be long.

All genes need to be activated, otherwise you would develop random body parts in wrong positions.

It is an interesting idea that the cancer is coming from INSIDE YOUR BODY all along, and the pollution we thought was causing it was merely activating the gene.

This would mean that reducing pollution would be more of a delay for cancer rather than a cure. Of course, if we delay it long enough people can die from other causes. Even if it comes late, I would love to not get lung cancer until I turn 120.

The idea that the mutations are already there but stay inactive until something triggers them is not new, though this study may have added something to our understanding of some of the mechanisms. I read a number of years ago that experiments in mice have shown that you can cause a bunch of DNA mutations in mice that stay silent until you cut the area that was exposed to the carcinogen. When the cells start dividing to heal the cut, the silent mutations suddenly become active and cancer develops. The mut

I am curious how this affects the view on radon. Radon is a noble gas emitted from natural rocks which decays and releases alpha particles. This is extremely bad to inhale and is the leading cause of lung cancer after smoking, according to present knowledge.

There is an excellent and dramatic TED talk on the subject here: https://www.ted.com/talks/aaro... [ted.com]

I have long suspected the mixture of radon and fine particulate matter to be dangerous, as radon daughters are known to attach to them. This is even used in animal studies to find out where nano-particles migrate to when inhaled.

In Sweden, the rock material used for concrete is very rich in uranium and historically we have used alum shale to create lightweight "gas" concrete. The latter has high enough uranium content that it was once mined for our indigenous nuclear programme.

The use of this construction material did not stop until the late eighties and ever single house I have lived in on the west coast of Sweden has used this conctrete. Our current radon level limits are twice that recommended by the WHO and 45% higher than US EPA limits.

A recent vote on lowering the allowable limits to WHO standards failed, motivated soley by cost. Despite 500 yearly lung cancer cases in Sweden (compared to 350 yearly traffic deaths) it was considered cheaper to let people die than to fix the problem.

That makes me happy I live in a wood-framed house without a concrete foundation.

I was focusing mostly on concrete due to the fact that it is such a widespread problem here, used in many old apartment buildings. But radon also comes from the ground, especially rock- and sand-rich environments. In Sweden our municipalities publishes color-coded radon maps based on data from the Swedish Geographical Survey office. You can use these to get a rough estimate of the risk.

The best thing is to actually measure the levels, provided you can stomach a bad result. Unfortunately in Sweden, if you ar

Our current radon level limits are twice that recommended by the WHO and 45% higher than US EPA limits.

It is the same issue in Canada. The WHO limit is 100 Bq / cubic meter, while Health Canada has it at 200, and the USA has it at 150.

Bq is a Becquerel, which is one radio active decay event per second.

I had 'measure radon' on my list of to do things for many years. Then last year Health Canada sent reminders for people to measure radon at home, because more people are spending time working from home due to

Thanks for the tip, but I already own a RadonEye RD200: http://radonftlab.com/radon-se... [radonftlab.com]

It is a Bluetooth-connected logger with an excellent app and a real-time display. It measures in 10 minute intervals and applies a sliding window average. It can give a momentary reading in about an hour and runs on 12V, so you can even spot-check buildings on the go. Mine has been going strong for 3+ years now, but officially needs calibration after 2 years.

You can download graph data over Bluetooth as text files via t

If your population dies young, cancer will not be a major contributor.

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Comcast Starts Rolling Out 2-Gigabit Download Speeds to Millions of US Homes

Does Computer Programming Really Help Kids Learn Math?

When in doubt, mumble; when in trouble, delegate; when in charge, ponder. -- James H. Boren