There has been an ongoing debate in the scientific community on whether cancer is simply a matter of “bad luck” or if it can be prevented. This debate was significantly bolstered by a study published in the January 2, 2015, issue of Science, which suggests that 65% of cancer cases are caused by random genetic mutations occurring during stem cell division, rather than environmental or genetic factors. This concept, often referred to as the “bad luck” hypothesis, posits that many cancers arise due to unavoidable errors in DNA replication during cell division, which are beyond human control.
The study, conducted by scientists from Johns Hopkins University, used a statistical model to analyze the relationship between the number of stem cell divisions in various tissues and the incidence of cancer in those tissues. They found a strong correlation between these two variables, which suggests that about two in every three patients who develop cancer do so due to random genetic mutations, rather than developing cancer from environmental factors or inherited genes. However, this research has been challenged by other researchers, who argue that the role of environmental and genetic factors in cancer development may have been underestimated.
Is it just “Bad Luck”?
The “bad luck” hypothesis is based on the somatic mutation theory of cancer, the theory which states that the causation of cancer stems from DNA mutations of a single cell, concluding that cancer is limited by the occurrence of oncogenic mutations. These mutations occur randomly during the process of DNA replication in stem cells, which are responsible for cell division and growth and for the renewal of tissues throughout the body. The more stem cells divide, the higher the chance of mutations occurring, some of which can lead to cancer. This theory implies that certain cancers are inherently unpredictable and unavoidable, as they arise from random errors rather than specific lifestyle choices or hereditary factors.
However, other scientists critical of this research argue that it oversimplifies the complex relationship between genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors that factor in cancer development. For years, we’ve understood that smoking is a well-known carcinogen and increases smokers’ risk for getting lung cancer. However, the “bad luck” hypothesis might suggest that even without smoking, lung cancer could still occur due to random mutations, overlooking and undermining smoking’s significant contribution in causing cancer – which is not merely a matter of bad luck but also of environmental exposure.
Read More: 5 Subtle Skin Changes That Could Signal Cancer
Criticisms of the “Bad Luck” Hypothesis
Several biostatisticians, including Clarice Weinberg and Dmitri Zaykin from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), have raised significant issues about the interpretation of the data presented in the Science study, arguing that the study’s conclusions were unwarranted and that the role of environmental and genetic factors was understated. One of their main criticisms is that the study overinterpreted the correlation between stem cell divisions and cancer incidence, which then leads the research to suggest 65% of cancer risk is due to random mutations. However, they point out that statistical correlation does not necessarily imply causation, and that the contribution of individual risk factors to each cancer type was obscured by the use of aggregated data.
Another concern is that the assumption that most cases of cancer are fundamentally unpreventable becomes problematic because, in many cases, multiple factors are necessary for disease development. For example, phenylketonuria requires both a genetic mutation and environmental exposure (dietary phenylalanine) to manifest..
Are Environmental and Genetic Factors important?
While the “bad luck” hypothesis highlights the importance of random mutations, it is imperative to recognize the important part that environmental and genetic factors play in cancer development. Environmental exposures, such as smoking and UV radiation, are well-documented and continuously researched risk factors for certain types of cancer. Similarly, inherited genetic mutations can predispose individuals to specific cancers. The interplay between these factors and random mutations is complex, and reducing environmental exposures can still lower cancer risk, even if some cancers are due to “bad luck”.
Recent studies have shown that environmental factors can influence the type and frequency of mutations, suggesting that the distinction between “bad luck” and environmental factors may not be as clear-cut as initially thought. For instance, smoking has been linked to specific mutation signatures in lung cancer, indicating that environmental exposures can increase the likelihood of mutations in genes responsible for cell growth and division.
Prevention is better than cure
The “bad luck” hypothesis has significant implications for cancer prevention and research strategies. If a large portion of cancers are indeed due to, in majority, random mutations, then efforts might focus more on early detection and treatment rather than prevention. However, critics argue that this could lead to a higher investment on treatment, a “cure” rather than pushing research into the direction of better preventative measures against cancer, and the role of environmental and genetic factors.
While we cannot rule out the role of bad luck and random mutations as a factor in cancer cases, lifestyle changes can still significantly reduce the risk of certain cancers. Avoiding smoking, limiting alcohol consumption, maintaining a healthy weight, protecting skin from sunburn, and staying physically active are all recommended actions to implement for lowering the risk of cancer risk. These measures can help prevent cancers that are linked to environmental exposures, even if they do not eliminate the risk of cancers due to random mutations.
Conclusion
The question of whether cancer is simply a matter of “bad luck” or if it can be prevented is complex and layered. While random genetic mutations during stem cell division undoubtedly play a significant role in cancer development, environmental and genetic factors also contribute substantially to cancer risk. The interplay between these factors is intricate, and both prevention strategies and early detection methods are imperative in combating cancer. Ultimately, the “bad luck” hypothesis should not be seen as a reason to dismiss the importance of lifestyle choices and environmental protection in cancer prevention. Rather, it highlights the need for a comprehensive approach that includes both prevention and early detection. By understanding the complex causes of cancer, we can better allocate resources to research and public health initiatives that address all aspects of cancer development, from genetic mutations to environmental exposures.
Read More: Fasting and Cancer: What Does The Science Say?