Jump to content




See all Safaritalk Special Offers

Message to Guests.

Welcome to Safaritalk where we have been talking Safaris and wildlife conservation since 2006. As a guest you're welcome to read through certain areas of the forum, but to access all the facilities and to contribute your experience, ask questions and get involved, you'll need to be a member - so register here: it's quick, free and easy and I look forward to having you as a Safaritalker soon. Matt.


Photo

how elephants beart cancer open access multiple TP53 genes


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 COSMIC RHINO

COSMIC RHINO

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 6,783 posts
  • Local time: 07:49 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sydney australia
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:Environmentalist

Posted 27 February 2017 - 07:50 AM

elephants are large  animals but have a low cancer rate

 

they have multiple copies of the TP53 gene when it mutates cancer happens

 

please see http://www.elifesciences.org   Stephen J Gaughran  et all  HOW ELEPHANTS  BEAT CANCER 

 

The article only deals with this genetic thing

 

it does not deal with recent work on human nutrition 

 

elephants eat what nature intends

 

they do eat a whole lot of high fat, low fiber ,highly processed food 


Edited by COSMIC RHINO, 27 February 2017 - 08:02 AM.

Wild Africa is in my blood. All life is sacred and interconnected. for the animals are fellow nations caught in the splendor and trevail of the earth.


#2 douglaswise

douglaswise

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Local time: 10:49 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:Researcher

Posted 27 February 2017 - 10:38 AM

@COSMIC RHINO:

 

Could you explain the meaning of the second line of the above post?  Is a full stop missing?  If so, it would imply that, when the TP53 gene mutates, it can increase the chances of cancer.  What is the relevance that you attach to the multiple copies? One might suppose that a mutation in any one could cause cancerous changes and therefore expect that risks would rise in line with number of copies.  This interpretation is at odds with what you have written in your first line. Unfortunately, the link you've provided doesn't take me to the intended destination.

 

Why have you introduced the subject of the comparative nutrition of humans and elephants after stating that the cited article doesn't deal with this matter?

 

Should your last line read "do not" rather than "do"?            



#3 wilddog

wilddog

    Order of the Pith

  • Moderators
  • 2,414 posts
  • Local time: 10:49 AM
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:East Midlands, UK
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 27 February 2017 - 10:55 AM

@douglaswise I think this is the page needed https://elifescience...ntent/5/e21864  for the research article itself . There seems to be another article cited below this one which may also be of interest.

 

I think the problem here lies in personally paraphrasing/interpreting the research and it is of course always better to read it yourself. 



#4 douglaswise

douglaswise

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Local time: 10:49 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:Researcher

Posted 27 February 2017 - 11:33 AM

@wilddog:  Thanks for finding a working link.  I found the paper interesting - though, by no means, typical Safaritalk fare.  If you read the other paper to which you made reference, you might have been appalled to notice the relatively high cancer rates of wild dogs!  I do think that we shouldn't get too hung upon cancer rates in humans.  They appear very high because other common causes of death are being reduced in prevalence, but we still have to die of something.  Death through old age no longer seems to be a medically- accepted category for cause of death.



#5 wilddog

wilddog

    Order of the Pith

  • Moderators
  • 2,414 posts
  • Local time: 10:49 AM
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:East Midlands, UK
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 27 February 2017 - 12:10 PM

@douglaswise Yes interesting cancer stats on other species!  Both articles fascinating although I got lost in some of the highly scientific terminology.

 

I think diet was mentioned in the first post on this thread as many humans are seeking answers on how to reduce their own risk and certainly diet has been indicated, amongst many other environmental factors, to reduce risk. But of course this article is nothing to do with diet; purely genetics and the incidence and variation of TP53 (or that is how I understnd it!)



#6 COSMIC RHINO

COSMIC RHINO

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 6,783 posts
  • Local time: 07:49 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sydney australia
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:Environmentalist

Posted 28 February 2017 - 07:01 AM

  • increasing size  seems to be associated with  a lower cancer rate
  • I am fascinated how anyone can do a genetic profile on mastadons and mammoth given the massive amount of time they have been extinct for
  • excluding  drought induced thirst and hunger , the natural ways  elephants ,rhinos and giraffes die is when their final set of teeth wears out
  • all three are regrettably threatened by human activity
  • giraffes to a minor extent can be taken by predators if their balance is disturbed , most noticeably when bending down to drink or when moving over tracks made of artificial materials

Wild Africa is in my blood. All life is sacred and interconnected. for the animals are fellow nations caught in the splendor and trevail of the earth.






© 2006 - 2016 www.safaritalk.net - Talking Safaris and African Wildlife Conservation since 2006. Passionate about Africa.

Welcome guest to Safaritalk.
Please Register or Login to use the full facilities.