Idaho's Weekly Journal of Local & National Commentary  Week 1614


Home • Up • About us • Contact • Glossary • Links



Back to Quack Off

 Quack Off               



by Free Market Duck

When Good Cells Go Bad

   What is cancer?  What, exactly, causes cancer cells to express themselves?   What is the solution to cancer?

   Two theories of cancer exist:  (1) the viral theory and, (2) the trophoblast theory.

   The predominant viral theory says that outside agents invade your body, or that somatic (good) cells mutate into cancer cells, and that there exist an infinite number of different cancers.  Each type attacks different parts of the body because each type is different.  Hence we have leukemia, melanoma, brain tumors, etc.  No common thread is postulated in the viral theory and, therefore, no silver bullet to solve all cancers.  The current solution by orthodox medicine is slash, burn, and poison:  surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy.  Slash, burn, and poison is a multi-billion dollar a year business, heavily subsidized by the government with lots of corporate welfare.  Still, over 500,000 die every year with no solution in sight.

   The trophoblast theory of cancer was postulated over a hundred years ago by Scottish embryologist John Beard, a professor at the University of Edinburgh.  He and subsequent researchers say that, morphologically, there is only one type of cancer cell, the trophoblast cell.  The trophoblast cell has a natural body function:  it arises from the meiosis (cell division) of a womanís diploid totipotent cells after fertilization.  The natural function of a trophoblast cell is to carve a niche into the uterine wall of the mother to allow the fetus to attach and thus obtain nourishment from her blood supply.  In this natural function, the trophoblast cells are extremely invasive and corrosive but are held in check by enzymes that protect the fetus.  At 56 days, the fetusí pancreas kicks in and the trophoblasts stop their invasive activity.  In rare cases when they donít stop, doctors call it chorionepithelioma, one of the most deadly cancers.  If not corrected, the mother and fetus will die in about two weeks.

   In the viral theory of cancer, nobody knows why cells mutate into cancer cells.

   In the trophoblast theory of cancer, everybody already contains potential cancer cells since the precursor cells Ė the diploid totipotent cells from which trophoblast cells arise Ė were naturally dispersed throughout the fetusí body during development when some 20% of the diploid totipotent cells migrating to the fetusí future gonads ended up elsewhere -- such as in your future lungs, skin cells, brain, or left elbow.  Thatís where they sit, until stimulated by steroids such as estrogen.  Estrogen helps repair damaged cells, damaged as from UV, tobacco, real viruses, or bonks on the head.  But remember:  no trophoblasts, no cancer.  Thatís why some smokers get lung cancer, others donít (dirty lung cells, yes, but cancer, no).  That's also why some 13% non-smokers die from lung cancer.  It has nothing to do with smoking per se.  It has to do with:  are the diploid totipotent cells already in the lungs and did they reduce to trophoblasts?

   In the viral theory of cancer, leukemia is regarded as a different cancer than Hodgkins or skin cancer.

   But the trophoblast theorists claim when you look at internal cell morphology, all cancer cells are exactly the same as trophoblast cells.  Outwardly, cancer cells appear different because the trophoblast cell is reacting to different parts of the body in which it finds itself.  90% of a tumor, for example, is comprised of benign somatic cells that are responding to the 10% carcinogenic action of the trophoblast cells.  The phenotype (outward appearance) is simply masking the trophoblastís internal morphology.  Internally, there is only one type of cancer cell:  the trophoblast cell in the wrong place at the wrong time.

   If all cancer cells are simply the naturally occurring trophoblast cell in the wrong place at the wrong time, we should be able to protect ourselves in somewhat the same method by which the motherís and fetusí bodies protect themselves when they cut off the natural function of the trophoblast during pregnancy.  We can.

   Trophoblast cells release lots of beta-glucuronidase.  In fact, this is, indirectly, the basis for pregnancy tests.  If a man tests positive in a pregnancy test, he is not pregnant; he has cancer.  Why?  Because weíre indirectly testing for the existence of trophoblasts.  Food with locked-in cyanide Ė much like poisonous sodium and chlorine comprising common table salt, Sodium Chloride Ė releases cyanide by reaction with the trophoblastís beta-glucuronidase, the cyanide destroys the trophoblast cell, while good cells are protected by an enzyme called rhodanese that locks up the cyanide molecule and flushes it away.  Thus, like vitamin C for scurvy, Amygdalin (vitamin B-17) is a silver bullet against the trophoblast.

   The viral theory of cancer explains nothing and costs a fortune.  The trophoblast theory of cancer explains everything and costs you the price of an apricot kernel, buckwheat, and cheap food containing Amygdalin.

   The real question is not which theory of cancer is correct.  The real question is freedom of choice in medicine.  Once again, itís the individual vs. the state.

   If I want to gobble up apricot pits to get vitamin B-17 FOR WHATEVER reason, thatís my choice.  If I choose orthodox chemotherapy, thatís also my choice.  But when the government mandates one theory over the other, it infringes upon my freedom of speech, freedom of voluntary association, and freedom of choice in the free market of ideas, commodities, and services.

   Should Congress provide the Idaho Downwinders with $50,000 as compensation for their possible consumption of Iodine-131 from the 1960s nuclear test fallout?  The correct answer is that it is far better for each individual to understand how to solve their current or future cancer problems than to argue about $50,000 from Congress.  From my point of view, itís like a bunch of ignorant 18th century sailors arguing whether the British Parliament should pay them 50 Pounds for contracting scurvy at sea when all they needed to do was eat a lime.

      back to top...


               Home • Up • About us • Contact • Glossary • Links   all contents copyrighted ©1994-2014   Free Market Duck tm   all rights reserved