This forum is about wrong numbers in science, politics and the media. It respects good science and good English.
I feel for you James.
As our illustrious host so often points out, cancer, like other illnesses such as osteoarthritis, (with which I suffer), is a disease of age.
Fortunately many people now live to an age where they can discover it as opposed to dying in their 30s & 40s. (Not that I wish that discovery on anyone, I just don't know how else to express it.)
Yes, I did see the DM article (it's OK, I didn't buy it and washed my hands afterwards) and thought it was utter cobblers', but it did set a tiny bell ringing. The good professor's ideas seem to have been comprehensively squashed in the Comments by people pointing out that most tumours are in soft tissue which doesn't generally fossilise well and anyway the Egyptian mummifiers removed the viscera during preparation. Add to that our bending host's point that cancer is predominantly a disease of old age and most ancient people died fairly young and that seems enough to dismiss this 'research'.
However, one might argue that greater age gives more time for biochemical insults and it is pretty certain that we are expose to many, many more novel chemicals today than the old gyppoes ever were.
Another thing that we have today that they didn't is freedom from fevers, which are ubiquitous in Victorian and older writings. This thought, as I said, chimed with an article I read a few years ago in New Scientist about a chap who'd treated cancer with bacterial preparations after noticing several patients with inoperable cancers go into complete remission after infections. I went on this interweb thingie and found the chap I was looking for - Dr. W. B. Coley. Have a shufti and see what you think.
As an hypothesis, perhaps ancient Egyptians (along with everybody else) really did suffer fewer cancers than their comparable age cohorts today not because their environment was 'cleaner', but because incipient tumours were removed by the intermittent fevers virtually everyone had then. I'd suggest this could be tested by examining groups of people from 'pristine' primitive environments like Papua New Guinea or remote Pacific islands with age-controlled groups from western Europe and the USA, perhaps augmented by primitive people from fairly heavily polluted areas like Khazakhstan. The results might be interesting.
Hi James, were you here a couple of years ago when I posted on this?
Yes, these days, cancer is manmade to a large degree. It's modern guise was instigated by John D Rockefeller, a quack who sold petroleum waste as a cure for cancer 100 years ago. The scam continues to this day by the rockefeller dynasty, who monopolised the american medical system back in the 1920s, and quicky gained control of most western hospitals.
Cancer industry is worth over $100 billion annual. Many millionares thrive on the cancer-poison. industry. It wouldn't be worth a tiny fraction of that if ever the cure was shown to the mass public. So the powers that be keep the fraud of cancer in place. Codemming millions to misery and death year after year.
If anyone feels offended by my take on this because they have lost relatives to cancer, well so have I. It was a death in my family that set me off independantly researching cancer and uncovering this shocking truth.
Cancer is the bodys healing mechanism gone wrong. Too much damage, too little correct nutrients (many different types) are the causal factors.
Clues for the cure are pretty common outside the mass media. I just finished reading the James Herriot books. It's got the common thread in about the animals getting cancer (tumours) in the winter while they were stuck inside eating just hay, and at spring time when they returned to pasture the tumours would die by themselves.
"Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud, and that the major cancer research organizations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them."
Linus Pauling - one of an immense number of doctors who denounced the modern cancer industry.
I'm just visiting to scout for any new open minded individuals who've arrived on this forum since my last visit.
Why were scurvy and many other dieseases found to be curable by a natural substance, with no research and no money but over 100 years of modern medicine and $trillions have failed to help cancer?
The truth about cancer.Watch this.