Deseret News | Colon cancer mutation traced to 1630

Reader comments
Colon cancer mutation traced to 1630

MP | 12:39 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

It would be nice if they could divulge the names of the ancestor couple with the faulty colon gene!

dueling banjos | 3:34 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

that whats u get when you cross breed!

Lynn | 7:56 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

What are the surnames of the families involved? It would be nice for those of us who can trace their family to the 1600's to know so we can get screened if we happen to be descendents.

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 7:59 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

The University is not releasing that information to protect the privacy of descendants.

hht | 9:12 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

NAMES???

Names? | 9:17 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Not the current living people, but the family line so that people can know if they are descendants and can know if they need to get screened.

Think about it | 9:27 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

If the names were divulged, then the insurance companies could make the lives of those descendents miserable by not insuring them for certain risks of cancer. Could be a pre-screening motive. Think "Minority Report".

Susan | 9:37 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

I descend from several English families who arrived in New England (Wethersfield CT) in the 1630s. Many Americans know a lot about their ancestry (not just Mormons) so we are all now left wondering...having been left with only questions and no answers with your dangling of this rather startling tidbit. If the name of this couple is never disclosed you are doing a disservice to the population. It is sort of "Thanks...but no thanks!"

Anonymous | 9:51 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Responding to "Think About It". Yes, DO think about this. Today there are millions of descendants of this single couple with millions of different surnames. Revealing the name of this ancestral couple from the 1630s could in no way create havoc with medical insurance for living individuals today. Many of us tell our doctors about medical conditions of our parents or immediate relatives with no negative implications insurance-wise. Furthermore proving an ancestral line is not all that easy. (unrecorded adoptions, illegitimacies etc.). What one thinks is ones ancestry may not be so.

Lynn | 10:01 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Are they protecting the names of the family line because it may be an unusual surname? When one reports on something like this that may change the lives of many more people, they should be willing to report all the facts, not conveniently leave out the most important one: What are the surnames of the families that are involved in this study? My maiden name is an unusual one and it harkens to the British Isles. Release all the facts.

BL | 10:23 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Amazing! I am just floored by how incredible this discovery is!

Ann | 11:06 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

I am a member of "the NY" family, I am 42, at age forty I was diagnosed with colon cancer, I had an ileal anal anastamosis and am cancer free today. Thirteen years ago my mother died from AFAP at age 48,leaving behind six children, the youngest of which was 6 yrs old. I am a mother of six children, my youngest was 20 mos old when I was diagnosed~ THANK HEAVENS for the UofU's research and findings!!

ken | 11:15 a.m. Jan. 2, 2008

What has cross breed get to do with it? must Mormons in UT are of English blood

Andnar | 1:31 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Within the next ten years, technological advances will make it possible for time-traveling 'elimination' squads to prevent these individuals from passing on their mutated genes.

DC | 2:45 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

My wife is one of these families and has FAP as does one of my daughters as well as her father - luckily we caught things in time to remove her colon. We worked with Huntsman providing a detailed genealogy in order to help trace this mutation.

JMP | 2:58 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

How come these people-Ann and DC know the family, but the names of the common ancestors are not being divulged to the rest of us?

Leslie | 3:18 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Both my mother's and father's families can be traced back to the 1630s in Maine, Massachusetts and Nantucket. The population was still very small then, which makes the possibility of a connection much greater. But what is the point of issuing a health warning if you leave out the most important part? Those of us that may be at increased risk should have the right to know. I have no interest whatsoever in the personal business of people living today in Utah or NY.

Lynn | 4:07 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

What are the last names involved in this study? We have the right to know, especially if it could concern our health.

DCnTN | 4:51 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

If you don't have a family history of colon cancer, you don't need to worry what the family name is. If you do have a family history of this specific disorder, I'm sure the UU would cooperate with you and let you know all that you need to.

With this large a prevalance and at such a young age, you'd know if it was in your family.

bilbo | 5:04 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

I was diagnosed with advanced colon cancer at age 50 ( 9 years ago). I survied. My mother died at age 50 from colon cancer, as did HER father. HIS father died of colon cancer.
My cousin died at age 53 from colon cancer. HIS son died at age 32 of colon cancer.
We all have ancestors that come over in 1630s.
We never lived in Utah. BUT, I AM Mormon (only one in my family).
My daughter has been checked at age 30...very 5 years, too.
I am checked every 3 years.
I knew nothing of THIS gene until now...but, it does not take a medical genius to know this is genetic..I figured it out 9 years ago.

liberal larry | 5:56 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

If you are worried about having this gene, look at your family history, and go talk to your doc about getting scoped.

Anonymous | 6:11 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

From Lois Collins:

Deb Neklason released the couple's name so people would not worry needlessly. The coupleï¿½s name is Mr. and Mrs. George Frye.

It's important, she added, to know that if you are a direct descendent of this couple, and born around say, 1960, the chance you would carry the mutation is less than 1:8000. (We can precisely calculate this because each generation has a 1:2 probability and the family dates back 14 generations). So, no one in current day is implicated as having the mutation just because they trace back to the founder.

Ann | 12:53 p.m. Jan. 3, 2008

The fact is EVERYONE over the age of forty should be screened for colon cancer, just ask Katie Couric. If your family has a history of colon cancer (multiple generations dying from it) than shame on you for not checking it out yourself and blaming others for not informing you more. The whole reason the article was written was to raise awareness.... I think it did that. Now it's YOUR turn to be proactive... if you have cause for concern ACT ON IT, don't whine about it and do nothing. Lynn, WHAT "right to know" do you have? Seriously... that is rediculous! IF you have colon cancer in your family... you know, losing countless loves ones to it gives YOU the right to know. Undergoing invasive, painful, debilitating surgery gives YOU "the right to know". Being curious, having a little temper tantrum because someone isn't telling you something you WANT to know? THAT doesn't entitle you to ANYTHING. Put yourself in the shoes of the people this article is talking about.... I think You'll have a different perspective.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.