Fina and Cancer. IS there a connection?

[gregory]

yup, we all have many cancer cells in us at all times....

Well if it's there all the time then you are basically screwed.

 

[Generic MALE]

everyone who has AIDS would probably die from cancer)

You mean like the Kaposi's sarcoma that is so common in AIDS patients?

Cancer is multifactorial. Certainly lifestyle is a huge factor - that is why , for example, native Japanese women have a much lower incidence of breast cancer than women in the USA. but if native Japanese women move to the USA then their rate of breast cancer equals that of USA women. Smoking, diet, obesity, exposure to certain drugs is a huge factor.

Resistance is another important factor - cellular and serological immunity factor here. We all produce cancer cells regularly - but our immune system gobbles them up. Many things stimulate the immune system. Cervix cancer goes through many stages before the cervix tissue is actually graded as CIS - cancer in situ. Before it is CIS it is graded as various grades of abnormal. When it is very abnormal, but before it is cancer, doctors will often take a biopsy to determine its actual stage of development - in laymans terms : how abnormal it is. It is well known that venereal warts are the major cause of cervix cancer. Women may have venereal warts throughout the vagina, but get a local tissue biopsy of abnormal tissue - and this local surgery itself will stimulate an inflammatory immune response in the entire vagina and in the process eliminate all the vaginal warts. This is true of all warts even common warts on the hands and feet. People often get them, then soemthing stimulates a local immune response and the warts and the virus which caused them just go away on their own.

Another factor is vascular - cancers cells steal a huge network of blood vessels. Science is trying to find ways of starving the blood supply to cancer cells.

 

[Badbart]

Greatest and Gregory stop stressing, your both a little off the mark, but Greatest you are wrong and only make a fool of yourself getting aggressive when you are in fact wrong. Gregory is right to question you, and did so in a calm manner.

(Firstly, I'm a geneticist)

Cancer has nothing to do with the immune system (apart from cervical cancer in women which is caused by a virus).

1000's of mutations happen all the time in genes when your cells are dividing, but fortunatly we have certain genes present to stop this, namely the 'p53' gene, and there are also some others such as H-ras (stops cock ups in the eyes dividing), BRCA1 and BRCA2 (stops cock ups in the breasts and ovaries).

However, if your unfortunate to have a cell divide where things go wrong on other genes AND things go wrong on you regulating genes (p53 etc.), then your fucked... and cancer can occur as the regulating gene isn't working properly to stop the cell from dividing.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IMMUNITY!!! (Think about it.... people with AIDS die because of a cold effecting them as they have no immune system, if your thoughts were correct, everyone who has AIDS would probably die from cancer)

So, I think your way of thought, is spurious, and does not give a reason why tren might make you susceptible to cancer.

Just had to throw my knowledge on this!

Cancer is one of the fits things people with AIDS can get. They get a cancer on the tongue but I forget what the cancer is called.

 

[Moderate_THIS]

if you're that concerned, just add some Interleukin-2

 

[DIVISION]

Complex...

Your right about genes being turned on and off and enviromental factors play a big role in this.

This topic could get very involved and complex, but to put it simply, lots of genes get told to turn off when on AAS e.g the genes that initiate test production, the genes that initiate spermatogenesis. Some also get turned on, such as those that cause extra receptors to be made, and tell satellite cells to turn into muscle cells.

It is highly doubtful that there is a direct link between anabolics and cancer but indirectly...., well, lets not kid ourselves, I'm sure we're eleveating the risk, but possibly only by a fraction i.e. no where near what smoking does, or years of working in an asbestos factory.

Asbestos and cigarrette smoke are known carcinogens, and even then not everyone gets cancer from them, so given that AAS have never really been linked the risk is minimal and the other healthy life style habits such as working out, diet, supplementary anti-oxidents etc., should go some way to counter acting this (in fact the amount of anti-oxidents I take, I actually think I'm at quite a low risk). Hope this helps all concerned!!

So bascially, taking AAS is less dangerous than smoking, but still indirectly elevates our risk for cancer.

This is what I was thinking, but I feel it's still a gray area; something that hasn't been fully studied yet. We won't know the true effects of long term AAS use until most of us are long gone.

DIV

 

[DIVISION]

Well if it's there all the time then you are basically screwed.

Nah, mayne.....

What Paul Allen means is: all cells have the potential to turn in to cancer, given the right circumstances and environment. Cancer needs the right environment to flourish and a lowered immune system sets the stage for this, also if you are predisposed genetically to cancer this also heightens your risk.

I hope I wrote this so everyone can understand it.

DIV