How does a normal cell turn into a cancerous one?
146220
Cells have a lot of different genes that control their growth, and these genes are all copied when a cell divides.  Sometimes, there's a "typo" during the copying process, and there's a mutation in one of those genes controlling cell growth.  The cell can then become cancerous and grow out of control.  \n\nThe specifics may differ in different cases, but that's the general way.  Viruses can cause cancer by changing the DNA of a cell they are infecting, in a way that alters one of these growth-controlling genes.  Toxins can cause cancer by making a cell more likely to make a mistake, or "typo", in the genetic code.
307678
It affects us at the DNA level by increasing the level of mutations.  These mutations can cause abnormal growths, cancerous cells, & other unpleasant things.\n\nHowever it is possible that some of these mutations could be benificial.
286293
Cancer cells have mutations in the genes that control the cell cycle.  Some of these \ngenes tell the cell cycle to proceed, in other words they are "go" genes like the \naccelerator in your car.  These are called proto-oncogenes.  Some of these genes \ntell the cell cycle to stop when the cell is done dividing and no more cells are \nneeded.  These are called tumor suppressor genes.  They are like the brake on your \ncar.  If either of these are mutated, it causes the cell cycle to go too fast, like \nhaving your accelerator stuck to the floor or losing your brakes.  So the cancer cells \ndivide too fast and pile up in one area, this is called a tumor.\nThis is an extremely complex issue.  Essentially cell cycle is everything\nwhen it comes to control of growth in cells and that is just what cancer\nis...a loss in the control of cell growth.  There are many known and\nprobably far too many more unknown control points in the cell cycle that\nnormal cells lose when the become cancerous.  These can be in any of the\nstages, G1, G2, or even S.  There are a number of genes which exert control\nin the cell cycle, on eof the best known is P53 which is implicated in over\n50% of human cancers.\n\nHope this helps!
148386
DNA can be altered in the short term through damaging substances such as all forms of radation....including tanning beds...chemicals, etc.   These types of changes usually lead to cancer and is probably very close to impossible to lead to a good change (although the change would only be for one cell that would probably not be passed on).  The other way is through evolution, which is obviously the long term.
78044
Yes, in theory cancer has existed since the beginning of life. It exists in almost all known species (in one form or another). Cancer, simply put, is when a cell loses its ability to regulate division, and begins dividing (reproducing) uncontrollably. This happens most often due to a genetic mutation in the DNA/RNA of the cell. Mutations can be caused by radiation (including UV rays), toxins in the environment, and many other mutagens.\n\nIt occurs more often in older people because they have usually been exposed to more of these mutagens throughout their lives than younger people. There is also a genetic component – if you inherited genes from your parents that were precursors to cancer, then it takes fewer mutations before getting a cancer cell.\n\nThis is also the most likely explanation for why there are so many different types of cancer today -- people live MUCH longer than they did even 50 years ago, and are therefore exposed to more cancer-causing mutagens in their lifetime. People are also (on average) having children much later in life, which makes it more likely to pass on genes that have more genetic mutations.
918524
These are typically chemicals which do not occur naturally which increase a body's chances of developing cancer. These chemicals in some cases interfere chemically with your body's DNA and allow certain errors in transcription (which cause cancer) to occur.\n\nFiberglass for instance is a man made mineral which is considered to be a carcinogen.
322524
Cancer speeds up the process.  Spells divide more rapidly, and the cells that are produced are a little weaker then normal cells and they clump together and form a tumor.  Which then keeps growing, but it is still the body producing cells, so white blood cells don't see it as malignant.  \n\nCarcinogens cause the cells to divide rapidly.
297331
Do you mean, cancer cells use nutrients at a high rate than normal cells do? ---
707718
Normal cells have a standard lifetime.  They die after a given number of generations.  It's a natural process thought to be caused from shortening of the telomeres in the chromosomes (simple explanation).  \n\nCancer cells are able to multiply indefinitely.  That is why they are so dangerous in the body--having a mass of cells that multiply indefinitely eventually kills.  But in cell culture, having a cell line that lives pretty much forever makes them easier to use.
915581
A carcinogen is a substance that is capable of causing cancer in humans or animals. If a substance is known to promote or aggravate cancer, but not necessarily cause cancer,may act on deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), causing dangerous changes, or it may work to increase the rate of cell division. This change in cell division may work to increase the probability of DNA changes. Some carcinogens promote the development of cancer in other ways as well.
909728
Theirs no way to know with out a biopsy, that is a medical procedure carried out to remove cells that are then analysed to see if they are cancerous or normal....he shouldn't worry, most lumps turn out to be normal growths, but he should definitely make an appointment asap to see his doctor! Most cancers can be treated once found at the early stages....
512743
a cell mutates, divides and spreads, that is it. to cure cancer go to the source listed below.
310214
That's a rather broad question...  You would probably have to specify it a little more to get the answer you are looking for.  But that said, there are numerous reasons as to why animal cells may develop an "abnormal" morphology.  Basically, there are perhaps two categories that can roughly be differentiated, even though - again - you have to be careful there.  One would be genetic reasons, another would be environmental reasons.  Genetic causes could be numerous as well, but take certain cancers for example, that have a genetic predisposition.  Certain environmental toxins can likewise lead to malformation of cells.  Please note that I was talking of a genetic "predisposition".  Often in case of cancer ebnvironmental and genetic effects are both responsible for the adverse effects observed.  So, the two categories are not ontological absolutes.  \n\nPerhaps what would help you to envision the problem is the basics.  First, cells divide mitotically in unicellular organisms.  consequently, a central question would be the default state of the cell.  There are three possibilities: (a) quiescence (i.e., the cell does not divide and needs an initiation of the mitotic process), (b) proliferation (i.e., cells default state is division and it needs particular factors to asure quiesence as needed in many multicellular organs), and (c) neither, since cell division is contextual.  The most common assumption in biology (and cancer biology, for that matter) is (a).  (b) has been suggested by  Carlos Sonnenschein and Ana Soto ("The Society of Cells. Cancer and Control of Cell Proliferation." New York: Springer, 1999).  Personally, I tend towards (c).  \n\nSecond, cells that proliferate during organogenesis have to further differentiate into the morphology and functionality they are to have in a specific organ.  \n\nThird, certain organs have cells that proliferate, whereas other organs don't.  Consequently, once everything goes well intially in organs of the second type, malformation may not occur as easily.  However, that said there are of course cancers of organs that normally do not have proliferating cells.  \n\nThese three basics may help you to ask your question a little more specifically and then seek out the literature that could give you answers accordingly.\n\nFinally, just remember that what is considered normal in science is the mean of a population.  But what determines this mean is often unclear.  I am thinking here for example of norms of reaction where cells may be shaped quite differently in response to environmental factors, and yet function wonderfully - in fact just exactly as they should given the particular environment.  Now, what is "deformed" would have to be probably understood functionally (i.e., a morphology associated with a functional break down).  And it seems to me that this is what you are looking for anyway.\n\nHope this helps.
620261
Tumors are just cancerous masses.  There are many, many possible causes of cancer, most of which are not well understood.  It could be a genetic predisposition (such as a mutation in the p53 gene).  Or it could be due to environmental factors (carcinogens ingested or absorbed by breathing).  It could also be caused just by plain old bad luck.  Cellular processes are VERY complex, and things don't always proceed according to plan.  Occasionally things get screwed up and the cell division is no longer regulated properly.  I wish there was an easy answer for you, but unfortunately we have chosen the word "cancer" to describe many different conditions that have similar characteristics.  All cancers are conditions in which cell proliferation has gone out of control (i.e., the cells won't stop dividing).  However, the causes of cancer are too numerous to mention, and we probably haven't identified them all.  Plus, cancer can occur in so many different types of tissue, and the pathology of each type of cancer may differ.  However, if the cancerous cells are picked up by the circulatory system, they can spread around the body (metastisis).  The cancerous cells may end up somewhere else in the body and induce a new tumor to form.  One of the scariest situations is when the cancer spreads to the lymph nodes.  Lymphomas are cancers of the immune cells (which aggregate in the lymph nodes).  These cancers affect your body's ability to fight all infections, so they are particularly deadly, whereas melanomas (skin cancers) are quite treatable and rarely result in death.  Brain tumors are extremely dangerous for obvious reasons.  Any brain damage will have drastic effects; plus, it's very difficult (sometimes impossible) to perform the surgery required to remove a tumor from the brain.
815099
Some neoplasms (including cancers) are caused by viruses - think HPV - which are transmittable. Although that's not spreading 'cancer' as such.\n\nIn theory, were a cancerous cell which had broken off a tumor on it's way to metastasise somewhere else to happen to be drawn up into a needle and that cell were to be transferred in a needlestick injury (which is unbelievably rare to say the least - needlesticks aren't as dangerous as people might think) and that cell were to not be clobbered by the host immune system as soon as it entered the second person and that cell were to settle somewhere with a blood supply enabling to mitose then yes, cancer is transmittable.\n\nI just wouldn't place any bets on it happening.
642115
Cancer, in whatever form, can strike at any age. Some people are just more likely to develop cancer more than others and little can be done about it. It's what of those illnesses that strike, without warning, and can change a person life in an instant.\n\nThe cell that has cancer can move all around the body and affect different parts.  The cell will grow and produce more infected cells along the way. Chemotherapy is an option for some, depending on severity. It is often a painful process and does not offer 100% guarantee to rid the body of the cancers cell.s\n\nYou really should look it up on the net to find out all the possible causes and symptoms to get a good overall idea.
450415
Yes, the radiation from cancer treatments is very dangerous, but the radiation is directed in such a way that is that it will be more damaging to the cancer cells than to healthy cells.