A new study has shown a possible correlation between genes and the age a woman starts menopause. The study only suggests things, so that has very little value. Besides you can wonder what the use of this kind of information is.
They find that the age of a woman’s first period is related to the age of the last period. That has been known for a long time, but obviously this had to be officially researched. The only difference is that this time a genetic link is included. But actually scientists know a lot less about genes than they like to believe. Most of it is assumptions, that often don’t even make any sense. This study says that women who can repair damaged DNA better have later onset of menopause, but at the same time this increases the chance for breast cancer. Cancer has a lot of do with damaged DNA, so this is highly contradictory.
It’s nothing new either that these things differ from region to region and women of certain races start menopause later than others. But don’t be mistaken: these things rely a lot more on environment. 150 years ago it was normal for a girl to get her first period at age 15, but now that has gone down to age 11. This would be worth some research, as something is obviously not quite right. But then again, it’s not so difficult to know that environmental pollution is one of the main reasons. But changing that would cost way too much money, so it’s ignored and researchers focus on genes, which mean nothing.
“I think what is particularly nice about this study is that it suggests there is a much more important role for DNA damage responses in the timing of reproductive ageing than we actually previously realised,” So dr. Hutt is really happy with a study that only suggests something and then they don’t really know what it actually suggests. If that makes you happy it says a lot about the quality of the research you are talking about.
It’s amazing how much useless research is done about breast cancer, when the answers are everywhere. A little bit of knowledge of history combined with a little bit of common sense would tell any researcher what the cause of breast cancer is.
It’s the same as the cause of all other cancers: a toxic world, a bad diet and an unhealthy lifestyle. Genes have very little to do with it. They might be the cause of a minimal predisposition, but that’s about it. Whatever researchers try to prove, the idea that cancer is genetic is absurd, for 150 years ago cancer was very rare. Genes don’t change that quickly.
But let’s assume for a moment that the researchers have found some interesting information. “The researchers believe that earlier menopause reduces breast cancer risk because women have less exposure to the hormone oestrogen over their lifetime.” So what? What can possibly be the use of this information? Please, let me know if you see why this is so important. It seems very much like this research is nothing but a well paid hobby for the researchers. They keep themselves pleasantly occupied, get well paid and there is even prestige in this kind of stuff. But to call this science is pretty absurd.