Genetic NOT the cause of cancer

"...What is shocking to most people, the scientific fact that cancer is genetically recessive, not dominant. In fact, the human body is highly resistant to cancer. In 1969, Professor Henry Harris of Oxford University shook the cancer research community to its core when he proved these previous theories wrong. Professor Harris took normal tissue cells and fused three types of cancer cells to them. Surely, he thought, the cancer cells would take over the normal cells and "convert" them into cancer. Surprisingly, they grew normally.

Contrary to popular opinion, cancer takes several decades to develop in humans. Given this long incubation period, science can show us the way to destroy any initial pre-cancerous cells and keep the cancerous ones from causing widespread damage.If you think cancer has a genetic basis, then think again. Dr Robert A. Weinberg of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), one of the world's leading cancer researchers and discoverer of the so-called oncogene (cancer-causing gene), reversed his previous conclusions after discovering that "fewer than one DNA base in a million appears to have been miscopied". It's not enough of a defect! His exact words: "Something was very wrong. The notion that a cancer developed through the successive activation of a series of oncogenes had lost its link to reality." He called the genetic discoveries made thus far "sterile".6 The prime cause of cancer is therefore not genetic. This was announced in 1998. Did you hear about it? Probably not.

In 2006, the heads of the world's largest cancer research centre in Houston, Texas, announced that cancer's prime cause isn't genetic: "'If it could have happened [solving cancer with genetics], it would have already happened with genetic mutations,' said William Brinkley, a senior vice-president at Baylor who says other research should take precedence over the cancer genome project. Dr John Mendelsohn [president of M. D. Anderson Cancer Center] states, 'Any claims that this [genetic research] is going to be the key to curing cancer are not appropriate.'" Thus, the prime cause of cancer is not a genetic mutation. Even if cancer "runs in your family", there is real hope. Unfortunately, the geneticists have it backwards, attempting to force the facts to fit their genetics-based theories when they don't fit the facts, because, as Professor Harris demonstrated many years ago, cancer isn't genetically dominant. Where does this leave us? Where can we look for solutions? What about the popular nutritional solutions to fighting cancer?

"...Dr Otto Warburg discovered and clearly stated that the prime, most basic, cause of cancer is too little oxygen getting into the cell. "We find by experiment about 35% inhibition of oxygen respiration already suffices to bring about such a transformation during cell growth," he stated at a 1966 conference of Nobel laureates in Lindau, Germany.

Share this with your friends