Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes” • Hacker News Board

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#101

Post by scottishfiction » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:41 PM UTC

nonbel wrote: post #92

>'Prof Stratton said in these organs smoking seemed to be accelerating a natural mutational process, but how it did this was "mysterious and complex".' Wow, just wow. This is standard Armitage & Doll model that has been taught since the 1950s. Every time a cell divides there is some chance of a genetic error occurring. The more generations away from the zygote a cell is, the more genetic errors it will have accumulat…

It would be unfair to assume Prof Stratton is unaware of this model, rather than simply tailoring a technical finding to a non-technical audience.

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#102

Post by drvdevd » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:45 PM UTC

bigpeopleareold wrote: post #73

drvdevd wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I believe clinically, "addictiveness" is measured by what it takes to develop a dependence in the first place, rather that what it takes to get rid of that dependence or even the physical effects of an abrupt cessation. I heard somewhere (sorry no references) that by that measure, nicotine is one of if not the most addictive substance known.

I think you need very large quantities of whatever is in tobacco that makes you addicted to have physical dependency on it. (Is it nicotine?) I smoke a pipe on weekends. I have no physical craving for tobacco during the week and sometimes I just don't want to even on the weekends. The most amount of cigarettes I had throughout my life was probably equal to one pack and I never inhaled it because I don't feel like cho…

I love nicotine despite the "factoid" about its' addictiveness I listed above, and I say that as a former smoker (sometimes up to a pack a day, for about 6 years). I'm actually at the point where I can smoke occssionally and not feel the need to keep smoking, although I would simply prefer to vape anyway, personally. I too would like to know more about the effect of occasional smoking.

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#103

Post by nonbel » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:45 PM UTC

Unless I am misunderstanding something, their figure 3 seems to be plotting effect size vs p-value... So all it would be showing is that they had more data from lung adenocarcinomas (ie sample size is larger for that cancer type). It isn't 100% clear to me if they shared the data used for that figure, but here are the frequencies each cancer type appeared in table S1:

  Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML)                       Bladder 
                            202                           399 
                         Cervix             Colorectal cancer 
                            168                           559 
      Esophageal Adenocarcinoma           Esophageal Squamous 
                            242                           292 
                 Gastric cancer                        Kidney 
                            472                           257 
                         Larynx                         Liver 
                            123                           392 
                     Lung Adeno                 Lung Squamous 
                            678                           175 
                    Oral cavity                Ovarian cancer 
                            363                           458 
                       Pancreas                       Pharynx 
                            239                            76 
         Small Cell Lung Cancer 
                            148

It is essentially just figure 1 from here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1311.0081

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#104

Post by mathw » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:48 PM UTC

pizza wrote: post #95

Anything similar about vaping/e-cigs?

Not much literature on vaping as yet. However, British authorities currently consider vaping to be significantly safer than smoking, and encourage smokers to switch in order to help them quit.

Also, vaping fluids don't contain the many, many compounds which are present in tobacco smoke and known to be dangerous, so it seems quite likely it's significantly safer. The unanswered questions are over what long-term inhalation of vaping fluid might do.

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#105

Post by nonbel » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:50 PM UTC

scottishfiction wrote: post #101

nonbel wrote: post #92

>'Prof Stratton said in these organs smoking seemed to be accelerating a natural mutational process, but how it did this was "mysterious and complex".' Wow, just wow. This is standard Armitage & Doll model that has been taught since the 1950s. Every time a cell divides there is some chance of a genetic error occurring. The more generations away from the zygote a cell is, the more genetic errors it will have accumulat…

It would be unfair to assume Prof Stratton is unaware of this model, rather than simply tailoring a technical finding to a non-technical audience.

It really is not a complex concept. If that is too "mysterious and complex" of a process for the audience to understand then I doubt there is much point attempting rational communication with them. Note: I think the vast majority of people could easily understand my sketch above.

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#106

Post by DominikR » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:53 PM UTC

fithisux wrote: post #48

So, why do they sell cigarettes?

It is not your business to decide what other people should do with their lives.

Go live in North Korea or Venezuela if you desire having a dear leader who tells you what you should do with your life and leave us alone.

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#107

Post by adrianN » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:55 PM UTC

vibrio wrote: post #93

adrianN wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Can only be harmful" is pretty strong. You could have a set of mutations in a T-Cell for example that makes it super good at killing all forms of cancer.

You could get a 'super T cell' that behaves just as you want, or as is empirically observed, mutations would more commonly lead to leukemia. There is a phenomenon call somatic hypermuatation, that as T-cell respond to antigens, they 'get sloppy' in coding their DNA to optimize the response. It' has also been linked to blood cancers, so it is a risky approach, like many aspects of immunity.

Of course almost all mutations won't be beneficial (this is also true of germline mutations). But "can only be harmful" seems to imply that beneficial mutations are impossible.

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#108

Post by unfamiliar » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

nthcolumn wrote: post #54

Gatsky wrote: post #27

This has some legal implications. You can now prove fairly conclusively that your lung cancer came from smoking. I wonder if it will lead to a new wave of tobacco litigation. I think even Fisher would be convinced [1]. [1] https://priceonomics.com/why-the-father-of-modern-statistics...

Hitting yourself repeatedly over the head with a hammer can give you a headache. Not sure DeWalt are worried from a litigious point of view. I doubt there is a smoker alive today who can reasonably claim to have been unaware of the risks when they started. Anal point - why the apostrophe? Should it be "Smoking becauses hundreds..."?

The obvious difference being: that is not the intended use for a hammer.

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#109

Post by drusepth » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

So, could we detect what properties of smoking map to which DNA changes, and design a cigarette that maximizes net-positive DNA changes while minimizing harmful/negative ones?

Re: Smoking “causes hundreds of DNA changes”

#110

Post by mtw » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 2:10 PM UTC

drusepth wrote: post #109

So, could we detect what properties of smoking map to which DNA changes, and design a cigarette that maximizes net-positive DNA changes while minimizing harmful/negative ones?

What are examples of net-positive DNA changes?