Mystery of the Missing Breast Cancer Genes

cp418 · May 2012

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120508220004.htm

Erica3681 · May 2012

Thanks for posting this. Although I had two primary breast cancers (three years apart), I don't carry the BRCA gene mutations, but my husband (who had early aggressive prostate cancer and whose mother had breast and pancreatic cancer) does. He has speculated that there must be some evolutionary advantage to these mutations, otherwise they would have died out. Maybe he's onto something, though NOT something that makes me want my children or grandchildren to inherit this mutation (my sons haven't been tested and my older son's wife is expecting my first grandchild).

otter · May 2012

The premise of the research is that women with mutations in their BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes are more fertile than women who don't have BRCA mutations. (That would be in line with what your husband has speculated, Erica/Barbara.) The increased fertility in those families means the percentage of people who have BRCA mutations (i.e., the frequency of BRCA mutations in the population) ought to be increasing ... but that isn't happening.

One theory to explain the fact that the gene frequency isn't increasing is that there is a lack of grandparents in the families in which BRCA mutations are present. Sociologists have theorized that families in which grandparents are actively involved in child-rearing tend to have more children. So... perhaps the absence of grandparents has resulted in couples deciding to have fewer children in those families.

Interesting hypothesis. It seems to be predicated on an awful lot of theory, though. Or maybe I've never been all that impressed with the validity of the laws of human behavior.

otter

Mystery of the Missing Breast Cancer Genes

Comments

Categories