• Big Pharma, Big Ag fight to keep the truth about cancer’s causes hidden from public.
By James Spounias —
It can really put a crick in one’s neck following the volley of differing scientific opinions on the origin of cancer. A study done by Johns Hopkins scientists at the beginning of 2015 blamed “bad luck” for two-thirds of all cancers.
Now, a December 16, 2015 study from Stony Brook University in the journal Nature rebuts the Hopkins study, saying that 70%-90% of all cancers stem from avoidable carcinogens and radiation.
What’s a person to believe?
The Hopkins study excluded genetics and toxic environmental carcinogens as the cause of two-thirds of cancers, instead finding that during stem cell division, random DNA is incorrectly swapped for another. Hopkins scientists stated that where cells more rapidly generate, cancer is more prevalent because more stem cell division means more mutations. By not looking to environmental triggers or even genetics, which is largely overstated, Hopkins scientists personalized the cause of cancer to chance.
In the September 14 & 21, 2015 edition of AMERICAN FREE PRESS this writer emphasized that the Hopkins study could have been a clever rationale for corporate behemoths to shift blame from the growing awareness of toxicity-induced illness to mere chance. In fact, credentialed scientists who are known to deny the relationship between environment and cancer loudly championed the Hopkins study.
It would seem even a cursory examination of known carcinogens, such as Monsanto’s controversial glyphosate-enriched weed killer Roundup, would question the sanity of the Hopkins study.
The September article included as an example a sea urchin study undertaken by Professor Robert Belle of the Station Biologique de Roscoff, which is under the authority of the Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique and the Pierre et Marie Curie University in France.
A member of Belle’s team, researcher Julie Marc, explained that “the early development of sea urchins is one of the most recognized models for the study of cell cycles.”
“Concretely, we had sea urchins lay eggs. . . . Characteristically they produce large numbers of ova. We placed those ovocytes in proximity to sperm and put the fertilized eggs in a diluted solution of Roundup. I might emphasize that the concentration was well below that generally used in agriculture. We then observed the effects of the product on millions of cell divisions. We very soon realized that Roundup affected a key point in cell division—not the mechanisms of the cell division itself, but those that control it.”
“To understand the importance of this discovery, you have to recall the mechanism of cell division. When a cell divides into two daughter cells, the making of two copies of the genetic inheritance in the form of DNA, it gives rise to many errors, as many as 50,000 per cell. Normally, a process of repair or the natural death of the defective cell, known as ‘apoptosis,’ is automatically initiated. But a cell sometimes avoids the alternative [death or repair], because the point that controls damage to DNA is affected. It is precisely this checkpoint that is damaged by Roundup. And that is why we say Roundup induces the early stages leading to cancer. In fact, by avoiding the repair mechanisms, the affected cell will be able to perpetuate itself in a genetically unstable form, and we now know the origin of a cancer 30-40 years later.”
It’s no secret that a significant number of people worldwide are awakening to the dangers of glyphosate-laden foods, radiation, fluoridated water, vaccinations, electromagnetic pollution, as well as heavy metals floating from the sky and polluting our water from fracking and other detrimental sources.
Was the bad luck study intended to unleash scores of more studies, further distancing carcinogens and environment as causes of cancer? This would certainly help insulate the toxicity-promoting behemoths from scrutiny.
The Nature article pointed out that the team of Stony Brook University scientists, led by Yusef Hannun, rebuked the Hopkins study but left questions unanswered.
“Most cases of cancer result from avoidable factors such as toxic chemicals and radiation contends a study published online in Nature on December 16. The paper attempts to rebut an argument that arose early this year, when a report in Science concluded that differences in inherent cellular processes (bad luck) are the chief reason that some tissues become cancerous more frequently than others.”
Hannun should clarify what is “avoidable” because on its face this is a disturbing idea, which puts the blame on individuals rather than on the panoply of pollutants.
Nature quoted John Potter of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle: “There’s no question what’s at stake here. . . . This informs whether or not we expend energy on prevention.”
Whistleblower Janet McMahan has her own take on prevention.
In a comment posted to the online Nature article, Ms. McMahan wrote:
“After my son Ben, my two dogs and I developed cancer during the same time as four small children who live seven miles north of us, we found arsenic and lead in our deep well water. My husband is a physician. We asked our cancer patients to test their water as well. They also found arsenic and/or lead in their water, including those who lived in the city. There needs to be much emphasis on prevention . . . especially preventing cancer caused by drinking water. Every home needs a water filter at least for cooking and drinking . Every home needs to flush water heaters (if they have them) monthly to remove arsenic, radon, lead etc. that com es into the shower through steam. NIEHS [National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences] told my husband that they have known since the ‘80s that there is enough arsenic in the water here to cause cancer clusters, but they are not allow ed to warn anyone . Jane Perry at the Georgia Department of Health wants to warn everyone, including doctors, ‘below the gnat line’ to test water for arsenic, but so far she has not. Now four children who live south of us in Waycross Community have been diagnosed with sarcomas within 58 days.”
Will Hannun and other re searchers look to what is really killing us instead of limiting themselves to corporatist government sanctioned “causes” of disease?
Lead and arsenic in water supplies as cancer promoters can hardly be said to be bad luck or avoidable.
“Hannun and his team also used other lines of evidence to try to pinpoint the contribution of environmental factors to cancer risk. They looked at epidemiological data showing that, for example, people who migrate fr om regions of lower cancer risk to those with higher risk soon develop disease at rates consistent with their new homes. The authors also examined patterns in the mutations associated with certain cancers.”
Will American establishment scientists continue to spin theories that obfuscate the real causes of disease or will they buck the system and do honest, politically incorrect research on the causes of all diseases, without worry of offending establishment funding sources?
If they don’t wake up, scientists and their families, too, may suffer the same fate visited upon the rest of us.
James Spounias is the president of Carotec Inc., originally founded by renowned radio show host and alternative health expert Tom Valentine and his wife, Carole. To receive a free issue of Carotec Health Report—a monthly newsletter loaded with well-researched and reliable alternative health information—please write Carotec, P.O. Box 9919, Naples, FL 34101 or call 1-800-522-4279. Also included will be a list of the high-quality health supplements Carotec recommends.