I'm getting ready for work, so I won't take the time to write about
this at length.  It is just one of those things that is a bit
startling and I often like to post such things.  This is from
Medscape (free registration required):

href="">Could Dogs
Pose a Risk Factor For Breast Cancer?

Zosia Chustecka

June 27, 2006 — Breast cancer patients were twice as likely
to have kept a dog as a pet in the past 10 years than age-matched
controls in a small study conducted by researchers at the University of
Munich, Germany. They suggest that dogs may offer a route of
transmission for the mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV), as well as other
microbes, which could participate in the first steps of carcinogenesis
in humans. Writing in the June issue of Medical Hypotheses, they
speculate that pet dogs harboring such risk factors offers a possible
explanation for the increase in breast cancer in Western countries and
its correlation with a higher standard of living.

Asked to comment on the paper, Jennifer Wheler, MD, special fellow at
the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, says, "This is a
controversial area of research." The hypothesis is not new, as there
have been scientific papers in the past suggesting that MMTV or
MMTV-like organisms may contribute to the development of breast cancer.
However, she tells Medscape: "This is a hypothesis that requires much
more study."


More like this

Sometimes I have to look for blog ideas, trolling through various alternative medicine sites, medical news sites, or science news feeds or my medical and science journals. Sometimes ideas fall on me seemingly out of the blue. This is one of the latter situations. This time around, as I do twice a…
Remember our old buddy Eric Merola? He's the guy who made two—count 'em—two crappy, conspiracy-laden, misinformation-ridden, astonishingly bad bits of "great man" propaganda disguised as documentaries about a Houston cancer doctor peddling unproven cancer treatments and charging his patients tens…
I just have time for a short take today. (If you need more, fortunately, Bora has posted the 33rd Meeting of the Skeptics' Circle for your edification. Yes, my preamble was just an excuse to plug the Skeptics' Circle one more time.) In the comments of yesterday's post about a medical student who is…
Well that didn't take long, did it? Three days ago, I described a study that I had noticed in the October 1 issue of Cancer Research that described an animal study that strongly suggested that vitamin C administered at sufficiently high doses may interfere with the action of multiple…

Ni hao! Kannichi Wa! Epidemiologists, virologists and reductionists in general keep hoping for evidence of a simple viral etiology for cancer and this is one of the oldest specific ones next to Rous sarcoma virus. As in most epidemiology studies of this type, the question can easily be reversed. Do persons who like dogs have a tendency for breast cancer? MOTYR

By Mouth of the Y… (not verified) on 30 Jun 2006 #permalink

I find it very suspiscious that they published this research in Medical Hypotheses. This isn't a peer-reviewed journal, and it's usually for more theoretical musings. A paper with actual data should have gone out for peer review, so I'm wondering if they did send it to other journals and were unable to get it published.

The MMTV connection is an intriguing (but as the article notes, controversial) one, but I'm not aware of any evidence that dogs can pass it along. Sounds like they're stretching waaaay too far on this one.

I hope that perhaps the authors published it for the same reason I posted it; that is, it is one of those "gee whiz, I wonder if there is something to this" kinds of things.

BTW, the abstract is here, if anyone wants to look at the original material.