[lebuffon]

We have one solid example of cancer caused by members of the HPV family. The disease can be transmitted via body fluids and/or contact. So there's that.

My laymans take: Cancer is a disease of the DNA of a cell. Viruses survive by altering cellular DNA. It begs the question: How many other viruses cause cancer?

It also seems clear to me that the virus may not be the sole cause since not everybody gets cancer so it is a multi-variable problem.

Virus + X = cancer

This will be harder to nail down but with modern data tools we should be able to get there.

Makes me wonder: Is the cancer "industry" searching for causes or just after-the-fact treatment?

[maxerickson]

Makes me wonder: Is the cancer "industry" searching for causes or just after-the-fact treatment?

Why brag that you are uninformed?

Some of the more successful interventions for cancer are preventative (for example removing polyps during colonoscopies) and genetic counseling is common.

[gww]

There are other examples of oncoviruses including: Epstein-Barr virus and Human herpes virus 8 (Kaposi's Sarcoma).

Makes me wonder: Is the cancer "industry" searching for causes or just after-the-fact treatment?

There are billions of dollars spent on this problem through huge DNA/RNA/Epigenomics/Chromatin Accessibility sequencing initiatives. There is also a huge amount of model system work such as mouse models.

[lebuffon]

That is super news. Thanks for this.

[idontknowmuch]

Viruses are just another "mutagen". No different from UV causing DNA damage in your skin cells, other than the mechanism in which it occurs. The cause for cancer is well-known and, in hindisght, obvious, which is mutation.

The challenge though is mutations can happen in a plethora of ways and their effect is highly dependent on which gene is mutated. There is also the tissue context, e.g. inflammation, spatial structure, etc., that can setup a background for increased mutation. That is why targeted therapies are often the most effective, because they target the general causative feature of a given tumour subtype, the problem is not every protein can be targeted now and each tumour, even within the same subtype has their own unique mutational profile due to the stochasticity of the way mutations occur over repeated rounds of cell division.

And back to viruses, yes they cause cancer because they can mutate DNA. But it's pretty clear, most of the viral "enriched" cancer types are generally in places where transmission is commonplace, e.g. reproductive organs or head/neck.

[manmal]

Apparently, mitochondria and their (non-repairable) DNA play a big role as well.

[renewiltord]

Why stop there? Perhaps we must recurse our conspiracy theories one level more: what if the faction of the cancer industry that wants after the fact treatment is propagating theories like yours so that they can make the cancer industry seem like all frauds and stop research until proven otherwise. Then they’ll be able to sell their current methods even longer.

Hmm, a disturbing and dangerous thought. But what does that mean for my comment? Who is paying me? What do they want? Will the lizard men of Hippocrates command the subtle ghasts of Papilla to inflict deep and lasting injury to our very souls?

Troubling. We must investigate.

[lebuffon]

People who need to hit their revenue numbers make allocations decisions. That's not a conspiracy. It's what people have to do to keep their jobs in industry. And those decisions affect what gets the resources.

And yes I know that outcomes after detection have improved, but the HPV vaccine shows an alternative that to me deserves more resources.

I am simply frustrated by 60 years of research and lots of dead friends and family. If that's a crime get the tar and feathers while I strip down to my shorts.