“Cancer” is not a cause, it’s a symptom.

You're not supposed to cure cancer.
(First published February 13, 2013.)

I know a “Politics Blog” is an odd place to cover this issue, but it’s something I’ve wanted to write about for years.

For the last 20 years or so I’ve had this theory about Cancer, and in those 20 years, NOT ONCE has it been proven wrong:

Cancer is caused by chronic repetitive bodily injury/irritation, either environmental or genetic.

When damage occurs, the body tries to heal it. But sometimes before it can finish, the damage occurs again & again. Eventually, the immune system gets “stuck”, locked in “heal mode”. Cancer cells replicate so quickly, the now vestigial genetic code to “switch off” the healing process is evolved out of the cell DNA, resulting in “runaway cell growth”… which is the very definition of cancer. As such, “Cancer” is not a cause, it’s a symptom, and understanding that fact is the first step in finding a cure. I’ve also theorized that treating a patient with immune-suppressants (like “Prednisone”) are a potential treatment for people at risk of developing cancer (for years I’ve been wanting to conduct a study of cancer rates among people who take daily immuno-suppressants… like transplant patients, asthma sufferers, or those with auto-immune disease.)

Think about it: Lung cancer from smoking is due to repeatedly inhaling super-heated air and toxic smoke, damaging the lungs. Your body immediately sets out to heal this damage but before it can finish, the smoker lights up again, repeating the damage. Eventually, the body becomes “stuck” in “heal mode” because the damage never stops and those new cells no longer contain the (now unnecessary) genetic information on how to stop.

This is why Lung Cancer is most commonly caused by cigarette smoking. “Pipe” smokers more often fall victim to “tongue” and “throat” cancer because those areas receive the brunt of the damage, with pipe smokers often holding the pipe stem against/under the tongue or back towards the throat. Likewise, those who use chewing tobacco are more likely to fall victim to “gum” and “lip” cancer because that’s where they pack the tobacco in their mouth.

Just a few years ago it was discovered that the “HPV virus” caused cervical cancer in many women, and inoculating girls with the HPV vaccine at an early age could prevent tens of thousands of women from developing cervical cancer later in life. Ignoring for the moment the ridiculous feux right-wing “controversy” over how immunizing young girls could make them “promiscuous” due to living without the fear of contracting the underlying STD (yes, because a fear of “cervical cancer” is why so many young women don’t grow up to become “sluts”), once again we see how a chronic infection can cause cancer, and preventing that infection can prevent cancer. I’m telling you, this theory never fails. In 20 years, I’ve yet to hear of an instance of cancer that contradicts it.

There has even been anecdotal evidence that “bras cause cancer in some women.” If you accept the possibility that any repeated irritation or abrasions caused by such an under-garment could trigger the “damage-heal-damage” cycle that results in cancer, the possibility that some women have indeed developed cancer this way isn’t a stretch (translation: No, it’s not your imagination.) Oncologists dismiss the idea out of hand with the argument that, “If bras caused breast cancer, we’d see a lot more of it.” No one is suggesting ALL bras cause breast cancer, or that EVERY woman who wears a bra will develop breast cancer, only a fraction of those suffering some form of chronic irritation will develop cancer as a result.

But what about other forms of cancer? Is it any surprise bicyclist “Lance Armstrong” developed “testicular cancer” following hours upon hours of extreme training daily for years that subjected his groin to the stresses of tight bicycle pants and a hard bicycle seat? Yes, every cyclist doesn’t develop “testicular cancer”, but not every cyclist goes to the extremes Armstrong did to win the Tour d’France SEVEN times. Do you know anyone who spends too much time in the sun or in tanning booths? Don’t be surprised if they get “skin cancer”. “ObamaCare” even included a tax on tanning salons to compensate for the increased likelihood of skin cancer. People who worked around Asbestos for years (or install fiberglass insulation without a breathing mask) also frequently developed lung (and other respiratory) cancer from breathing in the tiny shards of hard fibrous material that got stuck in the lungs, causing fresh damage with every cough.

Then there are “genetic” cancers that are the most deadly and hardest to fix, caused by a genetic defect that causes the body to do something it wasn’t meant to do. The body then tries to “fix” the damage, but since the defect is encoded right in the genes of every cell in the body, there’s almost no way to suppress/fix the source of that damage. trapping the body in “heal mode” (ie: “cancer”.)

Sometimes “genetic” damage is environmental, the most recognized form being from Radiation exposure. Living things that have been exposed to either “high doses” of radiation in an instant or low-levels over an extended period of time frequently suffer cellular damage at a genetic level that is almost impossible to fix. We’ve all heard of people supposedly developing Leukemia after living near power lines, or various other bodily cancers resulting from living near a toxic waste dump, drinking poisoned ground water or living over polluted soil.

Famed OJ lawyer Johnnie Cochran died a few years ago of a brain tumor that formed on the right side of his head, precisely where he held his cellphone for hours every day. Family & friends reported that Cochran “practically lived on his phone” and was never seen without it up to his ear. For years, people have expressed concern over cellphones possibly causing cancer, so it comes as no surprise that after bombarding the soft-tissue off his brain to “cellphone radiation” day-after-day for years, he would develop a brain tumor in that very spot. And while the medical establishment (and cellphone industry) still refuse to admit cellphone radiation can be dangerous, everyone now recommends using “antenna shields”, “Bluetooth earpieces” and the “speakerphone” function to avoid holding the phone close to your head for extended periods of time.

ALL cancer is caused by “never-ending damage” the body just can’t fix.

There will always be exceptions to any rule. “Comedian George Burns smoked cigars yet lived to be a hundred years old”, some will point out. Yes, but perhaps it was Burns’ better immune system that allowed him to both smoke cigars without developing cancer AND live to be a hundred. Burns himself once spoke on the subject, noting that he often didn’t inhale the smoke, that he in fact used the cigar as a prop… “an applause sign” that he lit up (sometimes simply by blowing rather than inhaling) so the audience knew when he was done telling a joke. Maybe that played a part in why he never developed lung cancer. Every person is different and there’s an exception to every rule, so no one can say something “doesn’t cause cancer” simply because EVERYONE that engages in that activity doesn’t develop cancer. That’s closed-minded and stupid.

For years, I’ve been concerned about my personal health upon frequently finding signs of blood (very little) on the toilet paper after using the bathroom, due to irritation. I work on the computer and sit on my butt for hours every day, so I’m not surprised that such a problem would develop. Knowing what I know, I’m certain I’m a prime candidate for developing colon/rectal cancer, so I’ve made some changes to prevent this from becoming chronic. I searched for a brand of toilet paper that causes the least irritation, and I now make sure I always finish up with a “wet wipe”. Bleeding is now rare and I’m certain the new routine will help me avoid colorectal cancer.

Recently, I reported how I rushed my cat “Lefty” to multiple vets following daily vomiting that began in mid-November. The second vet (mis)diagnosed him with cancer of the spleen following a needle-biopsy (with 25% error rate) that found the presence of “mast cells”. After seeing three more vets (including a veterinary oncologist) who simply agreed with the results of that one biopsy without further testing, and two months of needless suffering, Lefty died on the operating table to remove his cancerous spleen. The autopsy found “Lefty” did not in fact have cancer and the cause of his chronic convulsions was in fact a stomach ulcer. The repeated barfing due to the ulcer was inflicting repeated damage to the spleen (just behind the stomach) causing it to be flooded with precancerous “mast cells” (found naturally in the body), which is what the vet found from the biopsy. Those “mast cells” weren’t the cause they were a symptom. But just try telling a doctor that. Doctors HATE when someone with no medical training tries to tell them something that contradicts their years of experience and training. When I suggest something might have “caused” the cancer, they are clueless as to what I’m talking about, and look at me like I’ve got two heads. Yet, they never have a better explanation as to how the cancer came to be. “It just happens”, they say. “The cancer was probably always there”, I was told, and it’s sudden appearance in the midst of this illness was simply “a coincidence”. Sorry, I’m a scientist. I don’t like “coincidences”.

I once suggested my theory to a newspaper science columnist years ago, suggesting “repetitive damage might cause cancer”. The response I got was a terse “Skin damage takes place under the armpits with every movement, yet doesn’t cause cancer.” Basically, I was patted on the head and dismissed like a foolish child. Yes, it is true that we cause tiny amounts of damage to our bodies every day simply by moving. But OUR BODIES ARE BUILT TO HANDLE SUCH DAMAGE. If it wasn’t, every animal on the planet would be extinct, dead of cancer billions of years ago. Our bodies can handle small amounts of naturally occurring damage in moderation. It is only extreme, unnatural repetitive irritation that our bodies are not designed to handle on a daily basis that results in cancer. Everybody spends time in the sun, but not everybody develops skin cancer. Only a few who suffer persistent skin damage over an extended period of time will. And the longer that damage is inflicted, the greater the chances of developing skin cancer.

Often, we hear of someone who “stopped smoking years ago” after being diagnosed with lung cancer, beat it, started smoking again years later, and the cancer came back “with a vengeance”, killing them quickly. That’s what happened to ABC News anchor “Peter Jennings”, who revealed shortly before his death that even though he had stopped smoking following “a health scare” years before: “I was weak after 9/11 and started smoking again.” His body, suddenly recognizing the same injury happening once again, basically “overreacted” by returning to the same level of immune response it was laboring under the last time it was trying to heal the damage he was doing to himself (sometimes referred to as “cellular memory”.) That’s why the cancer returns so quickly and at such a high level.

In the early ’80s, an Australian doctor named Barry Marshall had a theory that bacteria was a likely cause of most stomach ulcers, not the commonly accepted causes such as “stress, spicy food and/or too much stomach acid.” Dr. Marshall’s theory was repeatedly dismissed on the grounds that “bacteria could not possibly survive in the stomach with all that acid” and was summarily dismissed for years. Marshall and fellow pathologist Robin Warren, after frequently finding a specific type of bacteria present in the stomachs of ulcer patients, theorized that the bacteria they were finding was not a symptom but was in fact the cause of most peptic ulcers and gastric cancer. Frustrated after animal testing failed to prove his theory, Dr. Marshall downed a Petri dish full of his bacteria to test out his theory. As expected, he developed a peptic ulcer that he was then able to cure with antibiotics.

Dr. Marshall was on the outs with the medical establishment for years for using himself as a Guinea Pig, but it was undeniable that he was right and his discovery revolutionized the treatment of stomach ulcers. Prior to his discovery, strong antacids like “Pepcid” and “Zantac” were popular prescription-only treatments for stomach ulcers that raked in billions each year. Once it was accepted that antibiotics were actually the proper treatment, the makers of those medications quickly filed to sell them as over-the-counter treatments for “heartburn” to make up for the Billions they were losing with the loss of their target market.

Not unlike the “HPV virus” mentioned earlier, stomach ulcers were causing cancer in many patients because the foreign bacteria causing the injury were not being treated properly, thus resulting in an endless cycle of “damage-heal-damage” that the body could never overcome. Killing off the bacteria with antibiotics allowed people to finally heal and avoid developing cancer, resulting in a precipitous drop in stomach cancer rates.

“Cancer” is not a cause, it’s a symptom. So the first step in fighting any cancer is to determine the underlying cause. And knowing that “repetitive damage” can trigger cancer, people can do something to avoid getting it in the first place. But this is also important for people already in the early stages of the disease to know. Any treatment that promises a full remission may prove futile if the underlying “cause” is not arrested, eventually allowing the cancer to return. Getting the immune system “unstuck” once the “damage-heal-damage” cycle has begun is more complicated, but hopefully a greater understanding of how it begins will help researchers find an actual cure. In the meantime, “To be be forewarned is to be forearmed.” Please add your own experiences in the Comments below.

– last updated December, 2020


Writers Wanted

Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS


4 Responses

  1. fastfeat - February 18, 2013

    Interesting. Not my area of expertise, but very interesting.

    I’ll forward to a few people who know more than I do.

  2. Greg Whitener - February 25, 2013

    I like your theory. I have a similiar theory about AIDS, and the notion that a snapshot (Test of HIV) of ones immune system AT WORK (presence of T cells) is a reasonable predictor of all out failure of that system (and the impetus of that person’s descent into the pariah caste). Like cancer treatment, the money is in the treatment and not the cure.

  3. Admin Mugsy - March 27, 2017

    Once again, the latest research only further confirms my theory:

    CBS News: Research finds random genetic mutations are the leading cause of cancer:

  4. Prince - February 10, 2018

    I never thought I could find someone with the same theory. You have a point about this.

Leave a Reply