Early on, I have commented on some
suspected causes of lung cancer.
Here are more suspects, besides the above list -
10) bis-chloromethyl either and chloromethyl eithers (BCME, CMEs)
these volatile chemicals were used to make several types of polymers, resins, and textiles. In 1962, suspicion arose that an excess of lung cancers was developing in a chemical plant. Out of 125 male workers, 14 cases of lung cancer (13 being the small cell type) and 2 cases of laryngeal cancer among 91 men exposed in the 17-year period, as compared with 2 cases of lung cancer among 34 unexposed men. The lung cancer epidemic peaked 15 – 19 years after onset of exposure and began to subside thereafter.
11) chromium 6 exposure
Hexavalent chromium is used in chromium plating, stainless steel welding and production of chromate dyes. While the Juliet Roberts /erin brokovich movie did not specifically identify lung cancer as health hazard, both lab study and epidemiological investigations point to a significant link from chromiun-6 exposure to lung cancer. OSHA estimates that at least one million U.S. workers in welding, painting, electroplating, and iron and steel production, are exposed to chromium 6.
12) Arsenic in smelters and Silica in stone masonary
A US epidemiology study in 1989 found that mine and smelter workers with heavy arsenic exposure and initially employed at 16.9 years had a relative risk of 6.0 at developing lung cancer in comparison to the baseline group with only light exposure to arsenic and initially employed at 31.9 years. Similar lung cancer risk was also found in Swedish smelter workers.
In occupational settings such as mines, stone quarries and granite production, ceramic and pottery industries, steel production, and sandblasting, silica can provoke fibrotic changes and cancer of the lung, especially if inhaled as freshly ground crystalline silica dust. ... leaves open the question whether silicosis is a surrogate for a more pronounced exposure relating to higher cancer risk or whether is in itself a prerequisite in the development of lung cancer.
13) Cadmium, Nickel and Beryllium
Nickel - lung cancer risk, odds ratio, 1.7;
Beryllium - The IARC (8) , the National Toxicology Program, and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) have classified beryllium as a human carcinogen, but only at airborne exposure levels well in excess of the current occupational exposure limits. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies beryllium as a probable human carcinogen and the European Union states that beryllium may cause cancer by inhalation.
Cadmium - ... mortality from lung cancer was greatest among workers in the highest cadmium exposure group, and among workers with 20 or more years since the first exposure. A statistically significant dose — response relationship was evident in nearly all of the regression models evaluated.
14) papillomavirus types 16 and 18
Since the 1980s, a small but steady trickle of research (mostly non-U.S.) has implicated human papillomaviruses as a cause of lung cancer. HPV DNA has been detected in over 21.7% of non-small cell lung cancers. Type 16 is the same that causes cervical cancer.
A Taiwanese study suggests that HPV infection is alarmingly highly associated with lung cancer development of nonsmoking female lung cancer patients. The odds ratio of HPV 16/18 infection of nonsmoking female lung cancer patients is much higher at 10.12 (95% ci, 3.88–26.38) compared with 1.98 (95% ci, 0.84–4.76) of nonsmoking male lung cancer patients.
If HPV is the true cause of only 20% of lung cancers, this would equal over 30,000 US cases, or ten times the number of pretended secondhand smoke deaths, annually. This is also nearly three times more than the approximately 12,000 (CDC) new cervical cancers in the U.S.! Because smokers and passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to this virus, the anti-smokers' studies, which are based on nothing but lifestyle questionnaires, automatically falsely blame the extra lung cancers cancers caused by HPV on smoking and passive smoking. (http://www.smokershistory.com/hpvlungc.htm
[Note - my take on this: a) taiwanese studies used small cohorts, b) not confirmed by another entirely independent group, c) HPV not a lung infectious agent as i know it => honestly I remain skeptical of their claim]
15) your genetics or 'genes'
Please refer to my other post - "More on lung cancer 'genes' - What genes are they talking about?
" for details. Do yourself a favor - learn the difference between 'gene' and 'genetics'. I blame the English language. "It runs in your genes" - the most ridiculous most unscientific most misleading statement you can ever get. English language is not fit to express the black&white truth about somatic gene disease and germline trait inheritance.
Remember this - cancer is always disease of genes, and is occassionally disease of genetics (inheritance). In lung cancer, the first case of truely inherited or hereditary cancer is yet to be established, despite many years existance of national and international lung cancer genetics/inheritance consortium, millions of dollars in funding, and numerous 'break-through discoveries'.
As with any cancer, lung cancer risk is elevated with family cancer history. Here are some reports –
8226; Japan: A family history of LUNG CANCER in a first-degree relative was associated with a significantly increased risk of lung cancer ([HR 1.95). The association was stronger in women than in men (HR, 2.65 vs HR, 1.69), and in never-smokers than in current smokers (HR, 2.48; vs HR, 1.73). CHEST 2006; 130:968–975
8226; China: RR=1.95 for two relatives and RR=3.17 for three or more relatives with ANY cancer (not just lung cancer). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16 (11). November 2007
8226; Britain: A history of lung cancer in first-degree relatives was associated with a significantly increased risk in the proband where in both individuals the cancers were diagnosed before the age of 60 years (OR 4.89; 95%). A significantly elevated risk of lung cancer was also observed in association with a relative affected before the age of 60 years, regardless of age-at-onset of the disease (OR 2.08). British Journal of Cancer (2006) 95, 1288 – 1290
[HR, OR, RR hazard/odds/risk ratio, they mean the same thing]
suspected causes of lung cancer.
Here are more suspects, besides the above list -
10) bis-chloromethyl either and chloromethyl eithers (BCME, CMEs)
these volatile chemicals were used to make several types of polymers, resins, and textiles. In 1962, suspicion arose that an excess of lung cancers was developing in a chemical plant. Out of 125 male workers, 14 cases of lung cancer (13 being the small cell type) and 2 cases of laryngeal cancer among 91 men exposed in the 17-year period, as compared with 2 cases of lung cancer among 34 unexposed men. The lung cancer epidemic peaked 15 – 19 years after onset of exposure and began to subside thereafter.
11) chromium 6 exposure
Hexavalent chromium is used in chromium plating, stainless steel welding and production of chromate dyes. While the Juliet Roberts /erin brokovich movie did not specifically identify lung cancer as health hazard, both lab study and epidemiological investigations point to a significant link from chromiun-6 exposure to lung cancer. OSHA estimates that at least one million U.S. workers in welding, painting, electroplating, and iron and steel production, are exposed to chromium 6.
12) Arsenic in smelters and Silica in stone masonary
A US epidemiology study in 1989 found that mine and smelter workers with heavy arsenic exposure and initially employed at 16.9 years had a relative risk of 6.0 at developing lung cancer in comparison to the baseline group with only light exposure to arsenic and initially employed at 31.9 years. Similar lung cancer risk was also found in Swedish smelter workers.
In occupational settings such as mines, stone quarries and granite production, ceramic and pottery industries, steel production, and sandblasting, silica can provoke fibrotic changes and cancer of the lung, especially if inhaled as freshly ground crystalline silica dust. ... leaves open the question whether silicosis is a surrogate for a more pronounced exposure relating to higher cancer risk or whether is in itself a prerequisite in the development of lung cancer.
13) Cadmium, Nickel and Beryllium
Nickel - lung cancer risk, odds ratio, 1.7;
Beryllium - The IARC (8) , the National Toxicology Program, and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) have classified beryllium as a human carcinogen, but only at airborne exposure levels well in excess of the current occupational exposure limits. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies beryllium as a probable human carcinogen and the European Union states that beryllium may cause cancer by inhalation.
Cadmium - ... mortality from lung cancer was greatest among workers in the highest cadmium exposure group, and among workers with 20 or more years since the first exposure. A statistically significant dose — response relationship was evident in nearly all of the regression models evaluated.
14) papillomavirus types 16 and 18
Since the 1980s, a small but steady trickle of research (mostly non-U.S.) has implicated human papillomaviruses as a cause of lung cancer. HPV DNA has been detected in over 21.7% of non-small cell lung cancers. Type 16 is the same that causes cervical cancer.
A Taiwanese study suggests that HPV infection is alarmingly highly associated with lung cancer development of nonsmoking female lung cancer patients. The odds ratio of HPV 16/18 infection of nonsmoking female lung cancer patients is much higher at 10.12 (95% ci, 3.88–26.38) compared with 1.98 (95% ci, 0.84–4.76) of nonsmoking male lung cancer patients.
If HPV is the true cause of only 20% of lung cancers, this would equal over 30,000 US cases, or ten times the number of pretended secondhand smoke deaths, annually. This is also nearly three times more than the approximately 12,000 (CDC) new cervical cancers in the U.S.! Because smokers and passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to this virus, the anti-smokers' studies, which are based on nothing but lifestyle questionnaires, automatically falsely blame the extra lung cancers cancers caused by HPV on smoking and passive smoking. (http://www.smokershistory.com/hpvlungc.htm
[Note - my take on this: a) taiwanese studies used small cohorts, b) not confirmed by another entirely independent group, c) HPV not a lung infectious agent as i know it => honestly I remain skeptical of their claim]
15) your genetics or 'genes'
Please refer to my other post - "More on lung cancer 'genes' - What genes are they talking about?
" for details. Do yourself a favor - learn the difference between 'gene' and 'genetics'. I blame the English language. "It runs in your genes" - the most ridiculous most unscientific most misleading statement you can ever get. English language is not fit to express the black&white truth about somatic gene disease and germline trait inheritance.
Remember this - cancer is always disease of genes, and is occassionally disease of genetics (inheritance). In lung cancer, the first case of truely inherited or hereditary cancer is yet to be established, despite many years existance of national and international lung cancer genetics/inheritance consortium, millions of dollars in funding, and numerous 'break-through discoveries'.
As with any cancer, lung cancer risk is elevated with family cancer history. Here are some reports –
8226; Japan: A family history of LUNG CANCER in a first-degree relative was associated with a significantly increased risk of lung cancer ([HR 1.95). The association was stronger in women than in men (HR, 2.65 vs HR, 1.69), and in never-smokers than in current smokers (HR, 2.48; vs HR, 1.73). CHEST 2006; 130:968–975
8226; China: RR=1.95 for two relatives and RR=3.17 for three or more relatives with ANY cancer (not just lung cancer). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16 (11). November 2007
8226; Britain: A history of lung cancer in first-degree relatives was associated with a significantly increased risk in the proband where in both individuals the cancers were diagnosed before the age of 60 years (OR 4.89; 95%). A significantly elevated risk of lung cancer was also observed in association with a relative affected before the age of 60 years, regardless of age-at-onset of the disease (OR 2.08). British Journal of Cancer (2006) 95, 1288 – 1290
[HR, OR, RR hazard/odds/risk ratio, they mean the same thing]
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”
