This does not exemplify what I expect my future posts regarding research into medical sciences and nursing to be. This is actually an extra-credit assignment for microbiology. I had to write to a prompt that I didn't feel fit the information given in the presentation, so please don't judge.
I attended the Science Friday presentation on the 22nd
of November about cancer, genetics, and heredity. The flyers for the presentation themselves
were informative and thought-provoking: Cancer is always genetic, but when is
it inherited? I would wager that many
people, like me, have never thought about this important differentiation. The speaker, Kerry Crandall, gave an
informative presentation regarding the causes of cancer and genetic
testing. I learned quite a few things,
some of which actually had a surprising impact on some things I once thought.
One of Ms. Crandall’s first statements was that when she
started working in the field [in 1988], nobody was talking about hereditary
cancer. She went on to say that this
came up seven years later [in 1995]. This
was surprising to me, but it makes sense in light of the percentage of cancers
that are actually hereditary. One thing
that I learned about cancer and heredity that was quite central to the
presentation was that only about 5 – 10% of cancers are hereditary. If I had been asked to guess prior to this
experience, I may have guessed that about 75% of cancers were hereditary. Conversely, it is about 70% of cancer that is
believed to develop due to acquired changes, which include exposure to
carcinogens, the aging process, and chance.
Secondly, I learned about the characteristics of hereditary
cancer. These characteristics are that
multiple individuals on the same side of the family are affected with the same
or related cancers, over multiple generations, with the cancer occurring at a
younger age than usual, and no known environmental risk factors. The other types of causes are acquired
changes (which are sporadic) and familial.
Ms. Crandall stated that family history is that best tool for
differentiating between sporadic, familial, and hereditary cancers.
Finally, I learned that testing of multiple gene mutations is
sometimes done in a sort of “panel” test.
This testing looks for sequencing differences, deletions, and
duplications of various genes, and can take anywhere between a few days and a few
months to return results.
Ms. Crandall stated that federal and state laws protect
against discrimination based on results of genetic testing when it comes to
searching for health insurance. She also
said that laws are not so helpful when it comes to life insurance.
Relating these facts to microbiology in three different ways
is a bit more difficult. Obviously,
information about mutations in genes relates to microbiology as we look at the
processes through which cells divide and acknowledge that mistakes sometimes
happen in that process. The fact that there are 1000 or more mutations of
BRCA-1, some of which are “just mutations” that have no dangerous implications
that we know of, is just a point of interest.
Secondly, when we think about some of the environmental factors that
might make up some of the 70% of cancers created by acquired changes, some of
those causes in the category of “chance” might include microorganisms like
viruses (for example, human papillomavirus and its link to cervical cancer). Finally, a question from the audience about Factor
V Leiden clotting disorder piqued my interest.
This condition is caused by a gene mutation that causes the clotting
protein to deactivate more slowly than it should.
So, how does this affect the way I think? As previously stated, I was completely
surprised by the low number of cancers that could be considered genetic. Without having done any research, I thought
that my grandmother’s bout with breast cancer automatically meant that I was at
a higher risk for breast cancer.
However, being that she is the only member of my mother’s family who has
had breast cancer, and the only member of my mother’s immediate family to have
had any cancer at all, that her cancer occurred at age 72, and the fact that my
grandmother was exposed to carcinogens for decades in the form of heavy
secondhand smoke while my grandfather smoked cartons of cigarettes per day, it
is unlikely that my risk of breast cancer is elevated due to any genetic
factors. So, this has had an important
impact on my thought.
Secondly, because Ms. Crandall indicated that genetic testing
is not indicated for people with no elevated risk, and because I could face
discrimination if I was found to carry some gene mutations, I have come to the
conclusion that I am very unlikely to ever seek genetic testing to rule out
possible inherited cancers. (I might be
interested in having testing to determine my genetic origins, however, as my
paternal grandmother was an orphan and I’m very curious to know her background. It would be awesome to find some relatives to
visit in some faraway land…)
Finally, the 30% instance of familial cancer that is not
necessarily related to genetics, but more linked to commonalities in habits and
environment, inspires me to pay careful attention to what may be working well
in my environment and upbringing. We are
a very healthy family – low instances of cancer, obesity, diabetes, heart
disease, etc. It seems to me that we may
be doing some things right, worth continuing as tradition.
In conclusion, I am happy that I attended this presentation,
and found it informative. While I did
have trouble linking it solidly to microbiology in three different ways, I do
think that there is a very solid link between this information and microbiology
as we remember the processes of cell division and the ways that that can be
impacted.
