There are three causes of cancer.
There are the genetic causes, estimated to be between 5-10% of all cancers;
The familial (hereditary) causes estimated to be between 3-10%;
And, then there are the environment/lifestyle causes estimated to be 80-90% of all cancers.
The medical system’s research on a cure for cancer is not strongly focused on environment/lifestyle causes, but on genes—does this surprise you?
The story of modern research for a cancer cure really began shortly before the first world war with Theodor Boveri, a German scientist, who discovered that when he fertilized sea urchin eggs containing two sperm rather than one, many of the embryo cells ended up with the wrong number of chromosomes—and they developed cancer. He surmised that cancer was caused by abnormal genes—now called the Somatic Mutation Theory
About the same time, Otto Warburg, a German physiologist/medical doctor was also a studying sea urchin cells, but came to a different conclusion about the causes of cancer. He discovered that cancer cells only use glucose for energy instead of oxygen which healthy cells use. He surmised that cancer was caused through environmental influences around getting energy (a metabolic theory). This became known as the Warburg Effect. For this he was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1931.
In the decades that followed, researchers were divided between these two hypothesis until 1953. In this year, Cambridge scientists James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the chemical structure of DNA, and this changed the course of cancer research for more than 60 years. The duo solved a fundamental mystery of science by revealing how genetic instructions are passed from one generation to the next.
The breakthrough revolutionised biology and medicine. It allowed scientists to hypothetically link genetic differences with health outcomes. Scientists refocused from a metabolic link causing cancer, to regard cancer as a disease governed by mutated genes. The mutations were thought to drive cells to relentlessly divide and form cancer masses. This supported the Somatic Mutation Theory and Warburg’s metabolic theory was quickly swept aside—dropped like a hot potato. Today, Warburg’s metabolic theory is largely absent from all medical textbooks and the mutation theory is widely taught.
So our textbooks tell us we all carry cancer genes, ‘oncogenes’, that control cell growth. These are genes that when mutated cause cancer. The theory is that certain triggers, such as cigarette smoke, sunlight, and chemical carcinogens, damage cancer genes. When they are damaged, cell growth spins out of control—and this is what causes cancer. This theory has been regarded as the bedrock truth of oncology.
The history of mainstream cancer research is filled with moments of great hope continually followed by disappointments. Over the years, you’ve no doubt heard of ‘breakthroughs’ that have held the promise of a true cancer cure. None have panned out. Few have shown any effectiveness at all, and many researchers are now believing that the genetic theory for cancer may be completely untrue. (For more, see this article ).
In 2005, a collaboration between the National Cancer Institute and the National Human Genome Research Institute created The Cancer Genome Atlas Project to enhance the mutation theory and cancer.
The Cancer Genome Atlas Project set out to catalogue all the genetic mutations that were believed to cause cancer. It was predicted that the data would reveal an orderly sequence of several cancer genes, that when mutated, would cause the different types of cancer. In theory, this would then allow researchers to devise treatments to fix the genetic pathways that caused cells to grow out of control—and the ‘cure’ for each cancer would be achieved.
In 2006, glioblastoma brain cancers, lung cancers and ovarian cancers were genetically mapped. By 2014, thirty other types of cancer had been sequenced. The findings were shocking to those who believed in the mutation theory.
Three Shocking Findings
- The first finding was that cancer mutations are vastly different among patients with the same type of cancer. A single colon cancer mass can contain more than 11,000 mutations and there was no way to know which of them, or which combination, actually causes the cancer.
- The second finding was that with few exceptions (such as the BRCA gene that increases a woman’s risk for breast and ovarian cancers) single cancer-causing mutations could not be identified.
- An even more significant third finding was that in some cancers, they could not find any genetic mutations at all. This means that in theory the cancer should not be occurring in the first place!
Revival of the Warburg Effect
These findings have indicated without doubt, that mutations cannot be the soul driver of cancers (except for the three genetic cancers—the polyposis coli cancer, the xeroderma pigmentation cancer and retinoblastoma cancer). Nor could treatments based on the mutation theory be created to cure the disease—because if every patient’s cancer is different, then a different treatment would have to be devised for each patient. This is well beyond current medical capabilities. Now because of these findings, there has been increasing pressure by cancer researchers to discard the prevailing Somatic Mutation Theory of cancer.
The resurgence of research into cancer metabolism has recently broadened interests beyond creating energy from glucose through the Warburg effect to other nutrients, including the amino acid—glutamine—that can be synthesized from glucose. Cancer cells can uptake glutamine in excess of their metabolic needs, and shuttle excess glutamine back out of the cell in exchange for other essential amino acids to build the structure of a new cell on replication. Such is the demand for glutamine by cancer cells that they cannot survive without a continuous supply of it—known as “glutamine addiction”—and glutamine blockers have now become the research target of pharmaceutical companies, for the future of cancer treatment.
Otto Warburg’s cancer theory relating to cancer metabolism can be used by people who want to reduce the formation of cancer cells or kill existing cancer cells. It is well accepted that people can prevent cancer forming as well as kill existing cancer cells if they changed their diet to one that is high in fats, moderate in proteins and very low in carbohydrates. (See summary here).
The Lifestyle Ways to Starve Cancer Cells
If you wish to take more control over cancer following an operation to remove a cancer mass, there are alternative treatments to poisoning it (and yourself while you’re at it) or burning it with radiation. You can experiment with dietary protocols based on the Warburg Protocol—where you can starve cancer cells and give yourself a better chance to defeat cancer and prevent it from returning.
Eat principally a ketone diet. When you eat a high fat, moderate protein, low carbohydrate diet, your body goes into ‘ketosis’. That means you deprive any cancer in your body of fuel while your healthy cells run on ketones.
Additionally, if you stop eating three meals a day and go down to two (or even one), then your blood glucose normalises for longer periods, and this starves cancer cells.
Adding daily breathing exercises to regularly increase blood oxygen ratios creates stress in cancer cells.
Also you can take a combination of the following medicinal herbs to keep blood sugar/insulin low and rob cancer cells of nourishment: Bitter Melon (Momordica charantia), Barberry (Berberis vulgaris), Cinnamon (Cinnomomum cassia), Goat’s Rue (Galega officinalis) and Gymnema (Gymnerria sylvestre). For further reading go here.
What You Can Do Now.
Would you like to find out more about our Healing from Cancer Support Program? Working 1:1 with Bill Giles our Program teaches and guides you to understand why your cancer occurred and what you need to do to tackle it and, through significant lifestyle shifts, minimize its occurrence.
Or you contact us to arrange an initial, no obligation consultation.
You might also like to download my free eBook Eating Advice for During & After Cancer Treatments