癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
Re: Most cancers just "bad luck," chance mutations. I show that healthy living can overcome bad luck in #cancer http://t.co/MGhH0bEQ6J
Are 2/3 of cancers simply bad luck? Possible medical school interview topic #NHShottopics #oxbridge http://t.co/ovEAYZniHU
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
Random "effects of DNA repl. appear to be the major contributor to cancer in humans." Fascinating Vogelstein paper: http://t.co/Bf69VTc7iy
=> RT @EricTopol: Are most types of #cancer due to "bad luck"? http://t.co/ndToUArabG @sciencemagazine http://t.co/5emUaFVwHT
El artículo original sobre #cáncer y factores de riesgo fue publicado en Science http://t.co/QFyGPTjjO0
Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions http://t.co/m1CtNnzB5X via @sciencemagazine
2/3 of #cancer types are caused just by chance mutations rather than lifestyle @bbchealth http://t.co/TAXnxWbslo and http://t.co/AoJKP9Gt91
Seriously? Only one third of #cancer cases is attributable to #inheritance, #environment or wrong #lifestyle.... http://t.co/g3oSmHN5dg
Seriously? Only one third of #cancer cases is attributable to #inheritance, #environment or wrong #lifestyle.... http://t.co/g3oSmHN5dg
2/3e van de kanker is niet toewijsbaar aan genetische aanleg en leefstijl, maar pech http://t.co/deKQClVX05
@girlgeeks well this is the original article if that helps http://t.co/PmyTqvgNbS
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Are most types of #cancer due to "bad luck"? http://t.co/cbDR5DvNgm @sciencemagazine http://t.co/hCuonIPEh6
Cancer etiology. Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions. http://t.co/Tvgs1LVL3W
Are most types of #cancer due to "bad luck"? http://t.co/cbDR5DvNgm @sciencemagazine http://t.co/hCuonIPEh6
I have doubts about the conclusions in this paper. Wondering if the journalists who wrote about it actually read it http://t.co/Q8PaJ4dYbp
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Cancer variation = bad luck? Remarkable result by Tomasetti+Vogelstein. in Science 2 Jan 2015: http://t.co/GbebJoZfQo http://t.co/DwELiGCYUi
https://t.co/wSzbvRKyBe Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Кстати, а Вы эту статью уже видели: http://t.co/nafZ051WY4
I'm not sure that "bad luck" should be a term to be used in 2015. @sciencemagazine http://t.co/pgKbMpwh5j
מניח שכבר נתקלתם בכתבות שמייחסות סרטן ל"מזל רע" אז להלן המחקר עצמו, ללא כתבות. http://t.co/rr7ksAhgdA #Geek #Health
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
2/3 of cancers are due to random genetic mutations, rather than environmental or inherited factors, new study says: http://t.co/WAjxjzXLYp
Two-thirds of cancer cases down to biological bad luck: New study. http://t.co/fgtsncnjPg Science paper: http://t.co/XNnrZFLE38
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Cancer etiology. Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be expl... - PubMed - NCBI http://t.co/3cFqJzkEX7
Mathematical model finds cancer"strongly correlated(0.81)with total number of divisions of normal self-renewing cells"http://t.co/khLco5JVdD
Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions http://t.co/Lw1VidUH4b あとでよんでみませう
First day back at work, this paper is top of my list to read #2015. #cancer http://t.co/pExHTYWDNC from Vogelstein lab @HopkinsMedicine
=> RT @EricTopol: Are most types of #cancer due to "bad luck"? http://t.co/ndToUArabG @sciencemagazine http://t.co/5emUaFVwHT
2/3 Cancers depends on tissue specific stem cell division...BUT THIS IS NOT RANDOM AT ALL!! http://t.co/80u8wQkRLn
MT @erlichya: Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/WhZo7tcRRO
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
癌になると人は「ナゼ?」と思うが、2/3は不運で環境や遺伝因子の寄与は1/3。 組織幹細胞の分裂回数を検討してモデル化 フォーゲルシュタインら http://t.co/6jp9xS1RYy http://t.co/9QChPOnrqd http://t.co/VVQonQQIWs
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Havin agreat discussion w @salyouha about a newly published research at Science: 2/3rds of cancers r just"bad luck"! http://t.co/q90Ya60Eyu
Le papier sur la logique du cancer qui fait beaucoup causer : http://t.co/WKWso4GXBY http://t.co/yTMJ5CdlrU http://t.co/0fuKELa2tF
Variation in cancer risk explained by the number of stem cell divisions | http://t.co/HIiHkvHT9Q #cancer #stemcells @TapKadia @fischmd
Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions http://t.co/AWeNjySacK
No debemos olvidar que la "suerte" también se busca. http://t.co/vJgxG31Ew0
Le papier sur la logique du cancer qui fait beaucoup causer : http://t.co/WKWso4GXBY http://t.co/yTMJ5CdlrU http://t.co/0fuKELa2tF
“Bad luck” explains a far greater number of cancers than do hereditary and environmental factors http://t.co/XvVF29KEip @sciencemagazine
“Bad luck” explains a far greater number of cancers than do hereditary and environmental factors http://t.co/XvVF29KEip @sciencemagazine
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
"Random errors occurring during DNA replication...are a major contributing factor in cancer development". http://t.co/PVQR1LTOrF #scienceed
Research says: "Cancer isn't really hereditary!" DNA is irrelevant and Epigenetics (our perception) is EVERYTHING! http://t.co/EpcFrIjJUu
New from Science: cancer risk correlates with # of stem cell divisions in a tissue http://t.co/ecnabu5jlK
Evidence to help us stop blaming ourselves for cancer. Cancer is random bad luck and not your fault @sciencemagazine http://t.co/8zdLNrilMA
Kanker: kwestie van een beetje genetische aanleg, beïnvloed door omgevingsfactoren, maar vooral een hoop domme pech. http://t.co/2oc8O7U5zD
2/3e van de kanker is niet toewijsbaar aan genetische aanleg en leefstijl, maar pech http://t.co/deKQClVX05
Make your own mind http://t.co/gPhCi5ZDPX Via @sciencemagazine #cancer #luck So, lucky or not lucky
"Random errors occurring during DNA replication...are a major contributing factor in cancer development". http://t.co/PVQR1LTOrF #scienceed
"Only a third of the variation in cancer risk among tissues is attributable to environment/inherited predispositions" http://t.co/LtP9pRSYiA
"Only a third of the variation in cancer risk among tissues is attributable to environment/inherited predispositions" http://t.co/LtP9pRSYiA
Back-of-the-envelope calculations can go a long way in science, especially when combined with good hypotheses. http://t.co/cQyRVjHBFX
Majority of cancers seem to map back to random mutations, ie not hereditary or environmental http://t.co/CnmmMnYKuu
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
@demoniack «The majority is due to “bad luck,” that is, random mutations arising during DNA replication» http://t.co/mX3czPeZdH
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
@zzTurk pa ni lih nek populizem naših medijev. Mogoče tujih http://t.co/xGBDxgZseS
It's all how you frame it. "Two-thirds of Cancer Due to Bad Luck" also means 33% is NOT luck http://t.co/CHvPL9rNIy
Interesting corollary of Vogelstein paper is there probably aren't meaningful stem cell # in the heart to mobilize http://t.co/nlYtznCy9s
Interesting corollary of Vogelstein paper is there probably aren't meaningful stem cell # in the heart to mobilize http://t.co/nlYtznCy9s
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Also reflect the Science editorial: http://t.co/7fiTH6y3so
Yesterday's #365papers included the controversial "bad luck" cancer paper: http://t.co/1EHgKiCu87
Bad luck: The major cause of cancer? http://t.co/eEVsMZ8978 Or bad science? http://t.co/oJOIK4C3Xu @causalityblog @FLAHAULT
Random cell mutations explain a large number of #cancers (http://t.co/CPWMSGubM1) @UANurseResearch @UAlberta_FoMD
Cancer variation = bad luck? Remarkable result by Tomasetti+Vogelstein. in Science 2 Jan 2015: http://t.co/GbebJoZfQo http://t.co/DwELiGCYUi
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
Programming, Environmental Influence or Luck? Interesting article. https://t.co/wyYLb9BAX5
Am I the only one thinking the Vogelstein paper in Science misses key concepts in genetics? http://t.co/SsRQIvYhTb
genetics loads the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger! http://t.co/tBV0P6jNy1
Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions. By Bert Vogelstein. http://t.co/OG5M0Z7ZzH
Changos! Según este estudio la suerte esta echada: "La mayoría de los cánceres parecen ser causados por mutacion... http://t.co/abq3bkQfM0
Dr Banerji says recent Science publication on #cancer from "bad luck" is limited, needs further study @680CJOB http://t.co/kCeVxFowP4
I would have linked the article itself, but of course, it's behind a paywall. http://t.co/pGHCZX08uv #openaccess
Two scientists have developed a mathematical formula to explain the genesis of cancer - and they argue that most... http://t.co/5FNqbMmsP3
Cancer variation = bad luck? Remarkable result by Tomasetti+Vogelstein. in Science 2 Jan 2015: http://t.co/GbebJoZfQo http://t.co/DwELiGCYUi
Although #Cancer can be be caused by "genetic bad luck », it’s not a reason to give up your #healthy lifestyle http://t.co/Z0OYZfJTiv
Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions "Evidence-BasedMedicine" http://t.co/pPggBB7mSp
Bad luck: The major cause of cancer? http://t.co/eEVsMZ8978 Or bad science? http://t.co/oJOIK4C3Xu @causalityblog @FLAHAULT
@Graham_Coop @edyong209 obviously hype from the bad luck part of the story goes viral :P #science paper: http://t.co/yM4A629Kmu #Genomics
Bad luck: The major cause of cancer? http://t.co/eEVsMZ8978 http://t.co/6guMLMz678 @causalityblog @FLAHAULT
Cancer variation = bad luck? Remarkable result by Tomasetti+Vogelstein. in Science 2 Jan 2015: http://t.co/GbebJoZfQo http://t.co/DwELiGCYUi