.
GENETICS, CANCER and COMMERCE
"Nothing is in your hands about health and longevity, except choosing your parents wisely !!!"
-- Dr. T. Rama Prasad
Genetics and individual constitution play most of the game of health, disease and longevity, though lifestyle changes, medical check-ups and treatment can alter the course of the game significantly. Scientists found that a gene called LOS1 is linked to a genetic master switch which has long been associated with calorie restriction through fasting which is related to increased lifespan. Deleting this gene itself may increase the lifespan by 60 per cent. Eating throughout the day makes you age faster by 'switching off' longevity genes such as SIRTUINS (SIRT1, SIRT6). Situins cut inflammation, repair DNA and counteract oxidative stress to slow down the ageing process. Frequent eating of snacks also disrupts longevity pathways like 'autophagy', a vital housekeeping process that happens during fasting windows to maintain cellular health. Intermittent fasting can be a powerful tool to reset metabolism. Whatever the advantage of the good genes we have is negated by our bad lifesttyle habits of munching junkfood continuously. The bad habits of eating pull the trigger of the gun loaded with bad genes. So, it is less about our genes and more about our modern lifestyle.
"We have long known that Indians have a genetic predisposition for some non-communicable diseases." -- Prathap C. Reddy, the founder of Apollo Hospitals. On 5.2.2026, Dr. Reddy turned 93. He weighed 105 kg, had a heart attack 15 years ago, has diabetes for over 50 years, had high blood pressure and cholesterol. He said all these are due to the genetic predisposition of Indians, and are controlled by lifestyle changes and treatment (TOI, 5.2.2026).
Status on February 4 , 2026 (WORLD CANCER DAY):
An analysis of more than a century of lifespan data in the West showed that longevity is decided by the inherited GENES to the extent of 50 to 55 % (a major new study published on January 29, 2026 in SCIENCE ). This is a much greater proportion than the previous estimates of 10 to 25 %. The same may be true for cancer too. So, a bulk of the cancer incidence may not be modifiable. And, the increased incidence in the recent decades may be attributable to the various factors detailed below. And, the factors of bad lifestyle and environment may also lower the upper limit of the biological lifespan set by the GENES. A day may come when 'GENE THERAPY' injections may be used for cancer just as 'INCLISIRAN' gene injections (Rs. 1.2 lakh per dose) to lower LDL cholesterol.
According to the National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research, 2.5 million Indians have cancer, a jump of 26% in the last three decades, and the annual number of deaths is around 0.6 million people. Studies indicate that cancer is affecting the younger people too and that non-smokers are also victims of lung cancer. And, there has been a steep increase in the cancer treatment centres and cancer related products of high commercial potential. The big business barons of 'pharma-medical' industry exercise their tremendous influence over the 'noble profession' through ethical and non-ethical means as well. The industry is in the driver's seat with its enormous power, directing and dictating the profession. That's the root cause of the rot in the profession -- to know more about it, read :
https://drtramaprasad.blogspot.com/2017/03/medical-literature.htmlhttps://drtramaprasad.blogspot.com/2017/04/hydroxychloroquine-hcq-and-coronavirus_29.html
https://drtramaprasad.blogspot.com/2024/05/the-noble-profession.html
https://drtramaprasad.blogspot.com/2017/04/medical-conferences-clinical-meetings_30.html
https://drtramaprasad.blogspot.com/2017/04/science-and-nonsense-about-covid.html
https://drtramaprasad.blogspot.com/2020/02/over-healthcare.html
https://drtramaprasad.blogspot.com/2023/01/covid-vaccines-safe-or-unsafe.html
The scenario is evolving into a money-centred one, making cancer therapy prohibitively expensive. No doubt, with the technological advancement, we have been seeing tremendous benefits to the cancer patients. And, there has been an increasing activity in the field of 'cost-free cancer treatment' and 'palliative therapy'. For example, the SUKOON NILAYA PALLIATIVE CARE CENTRE in Mumbai gives 'cost-free' care even for the non-cancer patients. There is one in Hyderabad which has an 80-bedded well-equipped and well-caring facility to give advanced palliative care to terminally ill cancer patients during the last lap of their journey, entirely free-of-cost ( https://www.kusumatrust.org/project/sparsh-hospice/ ). There are 526 functional palliative care centres in India. Yet, there is a yawning gap between 'demand and supply'.
You may ask this question :
Most of the cancer cases are not diagnosed early. The treatment is expensive and has serious side effects. Most of the patients are aged. Is it worthwhile to have such treatment ?
The value of pursuing cancer treatment—particularly in cases of late-stage diagnosis among elderly patients—depends heavily on individual circumstances, including the patient's overall health, the specific type of cancer, their personal priorities (such as quality of life versus longevity), and available resources. There's no universal answer, but evidence from medical studies and expert analyses suggests it's often worthwhile for select patients, though not always, and decisions should weigh measurable benefits against real drawbacks like cost, toxicity, and limited life extension. I'll break this down based on key factors.
Benefits of Treatment
Even with late diagnoses, treatments like chemotherapy, radiation, or targeted therapies can provide meaningful gains. For instance, in advanced cancers, chemotherapy can shrink tumors, alleviate symptoms (e.g., pain or breathing issues), and extend survival by weeks to months or more in responsive cases. Studies show that response rates to aggressive chemotherapy are similar between elderly and younger patients, with disease-related survival often comparable when the older patient is fit enough. For elderly patients with advanced lung cancer, for example, chemotherapy has been shown to add several weeks of life on average, and in some cases, healthier octogenarians or nonagenarians tolerate it well enough to achieve remission or improved daily functioning. Lower-dose regimens, guided by geriatric assessments, can minimize side effects while still offering benefits like better quality of life and fewer hospital visits—some trials indicate this approach doesn't compromise survival and may even enhance patient experience. Early intervention matters too: Even a one-month delay in treatment can raise mortality risk by 6-13%, underscoring that acting promptly on a late diagnosis can still yield value.
For many aged patients, treatment isn't just about curing (which is rare in late stages) but about palliation—reducing suffering to allow more time with family or independence. In early-stage cancers caught in the elderly, surgery or radiation can be curative or life-extending with minimal disruption, improving outcomes significantly. Public discussions, like those on social media, sometimes highlight cases where elderly patients regret skipping treatment, feeling it could have bought precious time.
Drawbacks and Risks
Your points are valid: Late diagnoses often mean poorer prognoses, with five-year survival rates for advanced cancers in the elderly hovering around 50-60% at best, and lower for aggressive types. Treatments are indeed expensive—chemotherapy courses can run tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, straining personal finances or healthcare systems—and side effects like fatigue, nausea, neuropathy, or organ damage can be more severe in older bodies due to reduced reserves (e.g., weaker kidneys or bone marrow). Comorbidities (e.g., heart disease) amplify risks, potentially leading to hospitalization, early treatment discontinuation, or death from non-cancer causes. For frail patients over 80, radiation might be preferable to chemo for metastatic cases, as it's less systemic, but even then, it may not extend life much if the cancer is widespread.
Long-term toxicities can erode quality of life for survivors, and some elderly patients report that the modest survival gains (e.g., months) aren't worth the ordeal, opting instead for supportive care. In resource-constrained systems like the UK's NHS, there's debate on whether aggressive treatment for short extensions is sustainable, especially for very elderly patients. Ageism in care can also play a role, with older adults sometimes undertreated despite potential benefits.
When It's Worthwhile (or Not)
- Yes, if: The patient is "biologically young" (good organ function, few comorbidities), the cancer responds well to treatment, and they value extra time. Tools like geriatric assessments help identify who can tolerate it, reducing severe side effects by up to half in some studies. For example, a fit 80-year-old with treatable advanced cancer might gain years with adjusted doses.
- No, if: Frailty dominates, side effects would devastate remaining quality of life, or the patient prioritizes comfort over extension—some studies show older adults often favor quality-focused decisions. In very late stages, hospice or palliative care might offer better value without the financial or physical toll.
Ultimately, ethical guidelines emphasize patient autonomy: Provide accurate info on risks/benefits, avoid age-based denial, and let them decide. If facing this, consult a geriatric oncologist for personalized assessment. Advances in targeted therapies are making options less brutal, but for many late-diagnosed elderly cases, the scales tip based on what "worthwhile" means to the individual.
According to the World Health Organization, India had an estimated 1.16 million new cancer cases in 2018, and one in 10 Indians will develop cancer during their lifetime and one in 15 will die of the disease. So, it's no more a rare disease, thanks to the MODERN LIFESTYLE and the MODERN MINDSET !
On February 4, 2025, the WORLD CANCER DAY, what's new in India ? At least two gene mutations are more common in Indian women who develop breast cancer. Gene mapping in the West helped in early diagnosis, treatment and survival rates. India remains underrepresented in global cancer genome studies, and lacks adequate genetic variant data. According to the National Cancer Registry Programme of India, one in nine Indians is likely to develop cancer in his / her lifetime. There are more than 14.5 lakh people living with cancer in India. Since 2022, the incidence has risen by 12.8 per cent annually until 2025. Lung cance is more in men, while breast / ovarian cancer is most common among women. One in five cancer deaths is in people under the age of 50 years.
Now, what is CANCER ? Truth to tell, we don’t know much about it. Of course, we have moved a lot from ‘Radium needles’ to ‘Robotic surgery’; from ‘Family doctor’ to ‘Oncologist’; from ‘Horoscope predictions’ to ‘Predictive gene testing’.
You might have heard the story of ‘Predictive gene testing’ and the American Hollywood actress Angelina Jolie. She had her both breasts removed surgically in 2013 at the age of 37 to prevent development of breast cancer in future (preventive double mastectomy), on testing positive for the gene BRCA 1, though she had no symptoms at all. We don’t know why the legend, Steve Jobs, the most outstanding ‘digital brain’ behind the APPLE (iPod, iPad, iTunes, & iCloud) died of cancer.
Incidence of cancer is said to be increasing day by day. Bad lifestyle; bad foods; bad habits; bad industries; bad gadgets; bad luxuries; bad modernity; bad consumerism; bad cosmetics; bad business; bad environment, etc. are said to be the promoting factors.
Cancer is just one band of the wide spectrum of morbidity and mortality caused by these ‘bad’ things. Unless a course-correction is made, mankind is doomed to perish in due course of time. Wake up, dear man !
The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently (2013) added the polluted air which we are breathing to the list of cancer-producing agents ! Quit the planet ! Instead of ‘cleaning’ the planet and ourselves, we are focusing on medical and surgical ‘cleaning’ of the affected people, by establishing a $1.72 trillion cancer business.
Nowadays, we see a lot of high-powered ads highlighting tangible improvements with survival and quality of life with new approaches like ‘Molecular Targeted Therapy’, Liquid Biopsy & Next-generation Sequencing’, ‘Conformal Radiotherapy’, ‘Immunotherapy’, etc.
Perhaps, it is the genetics (indirectly, heredity / constitution / biological phenomena / environment / nature / God / destiny / superconsciousness / supreme being / creator of geo-biological phenomena / fate / 'karma' or whatever) that play a major role in causing natural morbidity and mortality. And, perhaps, only some modification of the constitution in the body can be made by what all we preach (but not practise !) about health.
Curiously, in a study by Nir Barzilal (Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York) about 500 persons who were in the habit of smoking, drinking and eating junk food were found to be in the age group of 95-109 ! The researcher said that they possibly posses “additional longevity genes” to buffer them against the bad lifestyle. Genetics may be more important than habits, but it should not be a statistical excuse for indulgence.
A study published in Molecular Biology and Evolution indicates that people who live in very cold regions like Denmark and Norway are at an increased risk of developing cancer. And another study concluded that 'jet lag' may increase cancer risk by disturbing our body clocks which are controlled by the same mechanism that causes tumours.
We still do not know all about the genes. There must be other ‘intermediate risk genes’ and other known (heredity, lifestyle, etc.) and unknown factors. All the same, genetics should not be a cause for worry for those whose relatives succumbed to cancer. I know of some who left the world prematurely due to that worry rather than the 'predicted' cancer.
People know a lot about the goodness of technology and the professional excellency in treating cancer. I am not going to write about it ... this is only a small 'scribbling' about some bitter truths and negative facts which may make the concerned researchers, technologists and the professional specialists squirm in their seats and get angry.
No last word is said about the cause or cure for cancer. That is what makes it a wonderful field for commerce ! There is "the Good, the Bad and the Ugly" in 'Modern Medicine' -- so also in cancer research, as is evident in the following quote:
“Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud
and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them.”
-- Linus Pauling, Ph.D. (Two-time Nobel Prize winner)
HOLLYWOOD STAR’S GENETICS
The word ‘genetics’ reminds me of the American Hollywood star Anjelina Jolie (aged 37 in 2013 and named Hollywood’s highest-paid actress by Forbes in 2009 & 2011) who was in the news in May 2013 all over the world – not for her Hollywood fame, but for making public about the surgery to get her both breasts removed to prevent development of breast cancer (preventive double mastectomy). The details are published in the op-ed article in the New York Times (May 14, 2013). The news went viral all over and her medical choice has the world up in arms. A Time cover story titled “The Angelina Effect” observed that she has put “genetic testing on the spotlight.” Jolie’s mother had breast cancer and died of ovarian cancer at the age of 56. The actress had a ‘predictive gene testing’ (which costs $3,000), and she tested positive for the gene BRCA 1 (harmful BRCA mutation). The harmful BRCA 1 / BRCA 2 gene mutation is associated with higher incidence of cancer of breasts and ovaries -- around 65 per cent may develop breast cancer, and around 40 per cent may develop ovarian cancer. So the actress is at a higher risk .
There are two medical options. Jolie may have periodical check-ups to detect cancer early, without preventive surgery, and with or without drugs like Tamoxifen. Or to have both the breasts removed surgically to minimise the risk of breast cancer. The surgery is not a 100 percent guarantee as 100 per cent removal of breasts is not guaranteed – even after radical surgery somewhere a little breast tissue may remain. If she belongs to the about 45 per cent of the cases who may not develop breast cancer, this mutilating surgery is unwarranted. But who knows ? She was told that she had an 87 % risk of developing breast cancer. Two years later, she got her ovaries also removed for the same reason of the possibility of getting cancer (40 per cent of chances of getting cancer of ovaries). She didn’t have any symptoms, only predictions.
Predictions are a ‘game of numbers’ ! Perhaps, as good or as bad of the words of an astrologer. An easy way of making a fool of one’s self is to predict the chances of getting cancer. Notwithstanding the tremendous advancements in science, we still do not know all about cancer. There must be other ‘intermediate risk genes’ and other known (hereditary, lifestyle, etc.) and unknown factors. It was her decision; she got the surgery done on February 16, 2013. For more information on this, click on http://blog.itriagehealth.com/angelina-jolie-public-double-mastectomy/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=CPC&utm_campaign=Jolie As far as the world is concerned, Jolie’s personal case is of no significance. What is of importance is the dust the news, coming as it is from a celebrity, kicked up and the debates that followed. This may create a huge demand for ‘preventive gene testing’ and a spurt in such kind of surgeries – warranted or unwarranted. Some wondered as to whether it (the public announcement) is a corporate ploy to promote vested interests of ‘preventive gene testing facilities’ and / or to influence the judgement of the ongoing case of “AMP (Association for Molecular Pathology) versus Myriad Genetics (which holds some patents on BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 human genes) whose judgement is expected to be announced in June 2013 in the US Supreme Court. If the Court grants the patent, it would be like giving a patent to Isaac Newton for the earth’s gravitational force!
After all, Mrs. Jolie who is widely known and committed for humanitarian service might have gone public only to help women in similar situation to take informed medical decisions. It is remarkable that she got the honorary Oscar award for her humanitarian work at the Goverors Awards ceremony in Hollywood (November 2013).
Huge ads have started appearing in Indian newspapers of ‘preventive gene testing / ‘genetic screening for the risk of hereditary cancers’ (26 genes including BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 in women -- “Fee structure: Rs. 31,955/- only – Ph. 07767971888 – www.datarpgx.com – March, 2014”). Genetic make-up is a very complex one. Our DNA includes genes from some retroviruses and some other germs also. We don’t know everything about the processes that go on outside the genes, the epigenetics. We have some seven octillion atoms in around 100 trillion cells in our body -- too huge to understand how they all work in sync ! And we see ads for ‘genetic markers’ for heart problems -- Apolipoprotein E Genotype Test, gp 21 Genotype Test, etc. There are huge ads on the World Cancer Day of 2025 in the media of discount offers for an advanced genetic testing for cancer.
As the advertisers say, the tests based on genetic screening may help in planning prevention now and treatment in future. On the other hand, some of the ‘normal’ persons today who are detected to have abnormal results on genetic screening may receive an early divine call sheerly due to the stress of knowing the abnormality ! Perhaps, they would have lived a normal span of life except for these tests. In a way, ignorance is a blessing in disguise !
Russian geneticist Dimitri Belyaev created foxes that looked and behaved like dogs -- wagging tails, licking their custodians, having upturned tails, with floppy ears – through selective breeding. We see a peculiar phenotypic polymorphism in bees. Why is there such a difference between ‘queen bee’ and ‘worker bee’ ? Is it due to a differential diet during growth and maturation -- the larva ordained to be the queen bee being fed a huge portion of royal jelly ( the protein royalactin) ?
DON’T CALL IT A CANCER
We often pump in drugs for lifelong by labelling a large population as “pre-hypertensive”, “pre-diabetic”, “pre-cancerous”, etc. Most of these people require only lifestyle modification and observation over a period of time before interventions can be thought of. In fact, a recent publication (July 2013) in The Journal of the American Medical Association suggested that some pre-cancerous conditions, like the one that affects the breast called ‘ductal carcinoma in situ’ should be renamed to exclude the word ‘carcinoma’ so that people are less frightened and less likely to seek what may be needless and potentially hazardous remedies that may include surgical removal of breasts. It is also suggested that many of the abnormalities detected during breast, prostate, thyroid, lung and other cancer screening procedures should not be called ‘cancer’ at all but should be renamed as “indolent lesions of epithelial origin” (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/open-page/does-cancer-need-a-new-name/article4986091.ece).
NEEDLESS / FUTILE TREATMENT
Needless and harmful treatment is often extended to too many of these ‘indolent lesions’. In the same way aggressive, expensive and painful surgical treatment / radiotherapy / chemo therapy is often given to patients with advanced disease only to prolong the suffering in the name of prolonging life. Many of these patients would definitely prefer euthanasia, if they know what is happening. When the immune system fails we “rarely cure, mostly comfort and always console.”
GRIM STATISTICS
Grim statistics show that one 1.16 million new cases of different cancers are diagnosed every year in India and that about 784,800 people died due to cancer in 2018. In India's population of 1.35 billion, one in 10 will develop cancer, and one in 15 will die of cancer. Though it is known that about 40 per cent of all cancers are caused by tobacco, the government has no will power to strangle the tobacco industry which has a stranglehold over nearly 275 million tobacco-users in India.
FABRICATED RESEARCH
During the recent past, tremendous advancements have been witnessed in the field of cancer leading to better understanding of the problem. This has saved scores of lives across the world.. However, the world seems to be running on money. It is said that there is a lot of money in the cancer and cardiac fields. Business barons seem to go to any extent to laugh all the way to the bank. They may even influence researchers and doctors to get favourable “scientific” evidence for their products – launched and yet to be launched – through “paid research.” There is too much of evidence on this. “The world famous not-for-profit Mayo Clinic, Rochester, US which spends $500 million a year on research concluded in 2009 that data about harnessing the immune system to fight cancer had been fabricated, resulting in the retraction of 17 papers in nine research journals.” Incidents of fraud in medical research are far too many to be ignored. Read under the heading “MODERN MEDICINE – the Good, the Bad and the Ugly” on this page. Go to http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/research/cancer.html to read the article “Cancer Research – A Super Fraud ?” and https://www.facebook.com/LCSurvivors/posts/273639842729834 to read interesting quotes and comments on cancer “charities”.
“Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them.”
--- Linus Pauling, Ph.D. (Two-time Nobel Prize winner)
Is this quote an 'eye-opener' to the realities OR an uncharitable comment by the Nobel Prize winner ? -- T. Rama Prasad
The following is a list of some of my 'scribblings', including a few from the 28 articles on COVID published in a monthly medical journal in 30 months (a world record). To open them, click on any of the titles. -- T. Rama Prasad
THIS IS AN ABRIDGED TEXT OF MY 'SCRIBBLING. THE FULL TEXT WILL BE POSTED LATER. -- T. Rama Prasad |
.
No comments:
Post a Comment