"No, cancer is not the result of bad luck"

[Lawgiver]

http://naturalsociety.com/no-cancer-not-result-bad-luck/

I'd love to hear the thoughts of some professionals about this article. Btw the article cites and links to a fair number of primary sources.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Raygun77]

I'll bite!

IMO the article is overall rubbish but has a few good points- like smoking being a cause for cancer. But not because it 'depletes antioxidants'
It's also antagonistic towards allopathic doctors- e.g. re chemotherapy: "it could be considered as a tool or form of oppression"

It's poorly argued. The references have deep methodological flaws. e.g. antioxidants resulting in a HR of all malignancies of 0.52. Cohort study not randomised. Those inclined to take antioxidants probably had lower smoking rates, took aspirin, exercised etc.

Maybe an entertaining read though!

 

[Lawgiver]

i wasnt trying to be trolly. i appreciate the comments.

 

[Leo Aquarius]

It's clear this author is not a physician. Her claims are open for a lawsuit. First off, she is very misleading. Nothing "prevents" cancer. The best you can do is lower risk.

Sun exposure may lower cancer risk? She fails to mention anything about sun exposure being a cumulative risk for skin cancer. What a misleading claim.

I can go on and on about misleading elements about this study. She should learn what a confounding variable is.

If this were published in a poster presentation at a medical school, she'd be laughed to the streets. This is what happens when someone with a bachelors degree tries to tackle complex medical topics only to promote a "new-age" solution.

 

[Lawgiver]

What do any of you make of this cancer theory or hypothesis more appropriately I suppose:

"A new theory, however, states that cancer is actually a highly efficient, pre-programmed stress response. According to the author’s research, cancer is an evolutionary throwback from a genetic “tool kit” over a billion years old that is normally buried dormant deep within the genome, called Metazoa 1.0.

Cells with the genetics of Metazoa 1.0 would have favored traits that enable them to survive a much harsher environment with features such as extremely low oxygen. The trait of incessant proliferation was the default state of these primitive cells, when simply not dying was the first priority of individual cells.

The author the article refers to is I believe Dr. Paul Davis from ASU:

http://cancer-insights.asu.edu/2012/01/paul-davies-ph-d-cancer-as-metazoa-1-0/