Questioning The DNA Theory As The Origin Of Cancer

ricwally

There appears to be two distinct processes from which a cell can be reproduced. The first method
is by way of the cell replicating itself as outlined within that cell’s DNA. The second method is a
slightly altered procedure whereby the body’s own immune system is sent to rapidly reproducing
the surrounding tissues in an endeavor to heal over an area by way of ‘scar tissue’. A clinical
definition is as follows:

Scar tissue formation is a ubiquitous feature of adult wound healing, with the resulting
repair both functionally and cosmetically inferior to normal skin. At microscopic level,
the main difference between scar and normal tissue is in the alignment pattern of the
collagen fibers of which they are composed.
www.google.com final report on Grant GR/K71394
Mathematical Model of Scar Tissue

This excerpt further supports that there are indeed two distinct ways in which a cell can be
reproduced. The primary method has become the most understood way of the cell replicating
itself as outlined in the cell’s DNA code, which is referred to above as ‘normal’ cell replacement.
But a secondary, less obvious, and less understood process also exists whereby the bodies
immune system triggers the cells into this slightly altered scar tissue. Note that this second means
of cell replacement (scar tissue) is described as “functionally and cosmetically inferior”. Both of
these features, the rapid growth, and the inferior quality of tissues, are two attributes shared by
tissues manufactured by the immune system. But note also that these attributes are commonly
applied to tissues manufactured by cancer cells. These inferior qualities, and the non alignment of
collagen fibers, are not attributed to the DNA method of cell replacement. Recognize that the
purpose of a Burn Unit is to hinder the bodies tendency to rapidly heal over the burned area with
scar tissue, when the trauma of a burn has set off this immune response. This procedure allows
the slower process (but cosmetically superior) of natural cell replacement to have enough time to
heal the area in this sterile environment.
When we analyze the immune system more closely, we notice that it actually has three distinct
components;
i) to ‘identify’ foreign antigens that are deemed to be ‘enemies of the body’
ii) to ‘destroy’ these enemies of the body; and
iii) to ‘repair’ any damage that may have occurred during this onslaught.

This article will be focusing on the ‘repair’ aspect of the immune system, which expressed
simply, is the bodies ability to promote rapid cell division (the formation of scar tissue) to
quickly heal over breaks, wounds or openings in the skin, in order to reduce blood loss, and
avoid foreign antigens from entering the body by way of this new opening. The mechanism that
starts this process is not yet fully understood, but it is known to be triggered when the body
experiences some form of trauma. Obviously; once this process has been started, there must also
be some mechanism in place to inform the body of when the healing process has been completed.
That is to say, the body must be made to know when the rapid formation of scar tissue is no
longer required, so that the immune system can cease this elevated activity, and restore itself to
the level of activity that existed prior to the trauma. It does not require too much imagination to
realize that the inability to shut off this ‘repair process’, would result in a situation comparable
to that which we presently attribute to cancer. For example, a trauma to the breast would trigger
the immune response of repairing any tissues that may have been damaged. If the immune system
lacked the ability to know when this process was completed, it would go on to repair the tissues
in the breast, and a tumor resembling the scar tissue process (firmer density, different collagen
alignment, different pigment, etc.) would be the result. Similarly, if a faulty immune system
were to commence this healing process without there first being a requirement for it, (a fault in
the ‘identify’ process) then this too would result in an activity that would be indistinguishable
from our present definition of cancer.
Since there are two distinct ways in which a cell can be reproduced, it is only prudent that we
consider both of these scenarios as possible explanations for when something going wrong. Thus
far, only the DNA model has been investigated as being the cause of this affliction.
The immune system can make scar tissue by dividing cells from tissues other then the skin
cells. The immune system repairs broken bones by rapidly stimulating the regeneration of bone
mass at the break site. Similarly, muscle tissue, tendons, or cartilage tissue can undergo this
immune systems rapid repair process. Again this scar tissue is different from the original tissue
(cosmetically and functionally inferior). In fact, the body has over 200 different types of cells, so
in theory there could be, and probably are, over 200 different types of scar tissue.
The term ‘cancer’ refers to a group of diseases. All of these diseases have one thing in common
which is the non-required growth of cells. If it is a single flaw that is causing this non-required
growth, then it would be logical to expect that by fixing the flaw, we could stop all of this
non-required growth of cells. If the growth is not caused by a single flaw, then a single solution
should not be expected. The journey must start with finding one flaw that causes this
non-required growth. If it does not end there, then the journey must continue. The last hundred
years have been spent looking for a flaw in the cell’s DNA. The DNA is thought to be
responsible for this non-required growth. We have not been able to find the flaw in the DNA.
Since there are only two methods in which a cell can be reproduced, we need to now look at the
second method, which is the formation of scar tissue, and the accompanying inflammation
(which is the ‘lifeblood’ to support the existence of these newly acquired cells), both of which
are functions of the immune system. If a single solution can not be found that cures all cancer,
then perhaps we should be content with finding a solution for one cancer, and then proceed from
there. With over 150 different types of cancer, there could be 150 different solutions, but this
would imply that we are 150 times as likely to stumble onto one of them. For this reason, I
believe that there is but one underlying flaw that is responsible for all of this non-required growth
that we call cancer. This article will now examine scar tissue as a possible cause of this
non-requested cell replacement that we commonly refer to as ‘cancer’.
The immune system has in its arsenal, the ability to inflame an area with increased blood flow,
as it stimulate the neighboring cells into rapidly reproducing themselves. It is known that this
process is set in motion when the body experiences some form of trauma. When we can readily
observe scar tissue, as in the case of skin surface scars, we can immediately detect that this is an
altered form from that of the surrounding tissue. Because it was manufactured rapidly, and by a
different process than that of normal tissue replacement (normal cell division, as outlined in that
cell’s DNA), it has different characteristics. For example, scar tissue made from skin cells has a
distinct appearance with a smoother surface, firmer density, (described as a waxy appearance)
and a different pigment from that of the surrounding tissue.
The easiest cancers to observe this phenomenon are the surface cancers. Basil Cell Carcinoma
has all of the characteristics of scar tissue, and the same words are used in its definition (smother,
denser, waxy.). This common skin cancer could conversely be described as a slow formation of
scar tissue that is both unnecessary, and unyielding. This cancer is not considered to be a
dangerous cancer because it is slow growing and easily removed surgically. With this new
approach to understanding cancer, we could regard this cancer to be different in that; although it
has the cell division element, it does not have the accompanying blood supply (inflammation)
which is necessary to support the existence of these newly formed cells. Note that the shape of
the basil cell carcinoma would indicate that it can only grow to a size that can be supported by
the existing blood supply, and as it grows, the center cells cannot receive oxygen or nutrients,
and as a result, these center cells die off, leaving a hollow in the middle. If this tumor were to
have its own blood supply (inflammation), it would become considerably more dangerous.
Both the ‘DNA theory’, and this ‘Scar Tissue theory’ are able to adequately account for the
cancer cells having shared characteristics from the ‘host’ cells, however the latter theory becomes
much more complex by virtue of the fact that it must also account for the modification of the
existing blood supply. The ‘Scare Tissue theory’, is not required to account for the accompanying
increased blood supply, because the same elements that brought about the reproduction of the
cells, also caused the accompanying blood supply (inflammation). Both of these events are
normal functions of the immune system responding to a trauma. The DNA theory, must further
account for the presence of the accompanying blood flow to support the life of these newly
generated cells. With the billions of cells in the human body, it is conceivable to hypothesize
how the DNA of some of these individual cell might go astray, and start to reproduce themselves
repeatedly. But this event would be limited to grow only to the size that could be supported by
the existing blood supply. It should yield a ‘pea’ sized growth. If this chain of events were to
occur, the first step would be the cell replicating itself. It is reasonable to expect that there would
be a number of occurrences in which this chain of events started, but did not complete itself. That
is to say, there should be occurrences in which the cell did reproduce itself, but the
accompanying blood supply did not transpire. There should be hundreds, or perhaps thousands of
cases of these ‘pea’ sized tumors for every case that advances to full scale cancer.
The scientific community acknowledges the need to address the blood supply issue, and with
great difficulty they have postulated a complex chain of events that is both mathematically and
logically absurd. We are told that these cancer cells take on an ‘immortal’ status, and acquire the
ability to ‘disguise’ themselves, and ‘recruit allies’ in there defense, and a multitude of other
special powers that are attributed only to cancer cells. When you examine this supernatural chain
of events, and the obstacles that the cancer must overcome, and the safeguards that are in place to
prevent these occurrences from happening the way they are described, you would wonder about
the mathematical likelihood of this occurring even once. It requires much less credence to simply
hold that the immune system is causing the lawless proliferation of growth, (since it is its job to
do so,) and the immune system is also supplying the essential blood supply to support this new
growth, by way of ‘inflammation’(again, since it is its job to do so.). If we make this simple
adjustment in our model for explaining cancer, (by taking the blame away from the individual
cell’s DNA, and placing the blame on the immune system as a whole, or more specifically, the
repair and/or identify aspects of our immune system,) then we simplify things immensely. This
phenomena then becomes a candidate to apply ‘Ockham’s razor’. Why employ a complex set of
beliefs when a simple explanation already exists? Unexplainable events become, for the first time
explainable.
We now will not have to address why the immune system makes no attempts at attacking the
cancer cells. If the cancer were to be shown to be a legitimate product of a defective immune
system, we would not expect these cells to be attacked. It should be included here that the only
occasion in which our immune system permits any non-legitimate cells to coexist in its domain,
is when the foreign cells are from an identical twin.
The belief that cancer cells somehow become unrecognizable by the immune system is a
necessary stratagem of the present DNA theory. But there are no occurrences of this
‘unrecognizable’ phenomena in nature. To give credence to the concept that some cells are
unrecognizable to the immune system, we could phrase this phenomena to read; “ cells from an
identical twin are unrecognizable to the immune system.” We would then have at least one
natural occurrence of this ‘unrecognizable’ phenomenon. But this begs the question, Why? The
answer I believe is intuitive. These cells go unrecognized because they have the same
characteristics as the bodies own cells, and therefor the immune system lacks the ability to
distinguish these foreign cells from the body’s own cells. Therefore it could be concluded that
since cancer cells are also treated in a like manor to cells that are not recognized as being
different, then they too are deemed to be not foreign. To say that they are not foreign, is
equivalent to saying that they are domestic, or rather, a legitimate part of the body. If there were
other occurrences in which living cells were granted the same privileges as the cancer cells, then
this conclusion would not be as incontestable. Since there are no other occurrences (outside of an
identical twin) in which this phenomena can be observed to occur, then I feel that this conclusion
is warranted, namely that cancer cells are a legitimate product of the body, and their function
(stimulating cell reproduction) asserts that they are a part of our immune system. If we grant this
point, then we avoid the burden of having to explain why our immune systems leave the cancer
cells alone. Similarly, we would no longer have to account for how cancer manages to travel
throughout the body and take up residence in a new location, without being detected or
encountering resistance along its route. If we accept the cancer cell as being a legitimate body
cell, all these perplexing problems go away. We would no longer have to consider how cancer
spreads from one cell to another, or how it overcomes the multitude of safeguards that the body
has in place to prevent the sporadic mutation of cells, and the proliferation of this event into
neighboring cells. Cancer becomes much simpler (and mathematically feasible ) when we adapt
this new framework.
Under this new theory, we would view cancer cells as an integral part of the immune system,
similar in nature to the B cells , T cells or natural killer cells, but with a different function.
Whereas the B cells are involved in the ‘identify’ process, and the T cells and natural killer cells
are involved in the ‘destroy’ process, the cancer cells function is in the ‘repair’ aspect of the
immune system, specifically the formation of scar tissues. It copies the surrounding tissue, and
then making copies of the copies, until the wound is impervious. With over 200 different types of
cells, there would therefore be a potential for that many different cancer types. To date, just over
150 cancers have been documented. If we use this new model to describe Proteus Syndrome (i.e..
Joseph Merrick known as the Elephant Man) as the immune system starting to relentlessly
reproduce the bone mass in some individuals, then this too might be categorized as a cancer. I
believe that the same elements are at work that cause this disease as are any cancerous tumors.
But because this disease effects the skeletal system , and has no adverse effect on any vital
organs, or their blood supply, it has never resulted in a direct cause of death, and therefore has
avoided being labeled as a cancer. Another disease that I believe has avoided the classification
are some forms of heart disease and strokes. It is reasonable to expect from what we know about
cancer, that there should be incidents of ‘heart cancer’. The heart is a vital organ with access to
an unlimited blood supply, just as the liver, pancreas, lung etc. yet we never hear, nor have we
needed the term ‘heart cancer’. Using this new model, I would deduce that the same element
exist in heart disease, as in cancer. Hardening of the arteries would be accounted for by the
immune system relentlessly repairing the cells of the artery walls with the formation of scar
tissue, causing restrictions in the blood flow due to the changed dimensions. Scaring can be
observed in many heart attack victims. Postmortem’s and biopsies of heart attack victims have
shown that there is both fat and fibrosis (scar tissue) replacing the muscle cells in the heart. Often
a patient can be identified as having suffered a heart attack by observing scaring of the heart
tissue, even if the patient is not aware that he or she has had a heart attack. For the patient to be
unaware, implies that the heart attack in some instances is an ongoing ‘process’ and not a single
‘event’. If the immune system started to repair the muscle tissue of the heart, and replace these
muscle cells with fibrosis that could not perform the same function, then this would be an
ongoing process that would likely go undetected until the heart was no longer capable of
performing its function. If the heart attack victim is rushed into the operating room and the chest
cavity is opened, the surgeon will be able to observe the scarring. But note that scarring is not an
instantaneous process. The heart attack did not cause the scar tissue. There has not been enough
time laps for this to occur. But rather, the scar tissue caused the heart attack. And the immune
system caused the scar tissue. A long drawn out fight with the disease is unlikely because any
blockage or restrictions caused by the scar tissue will have immediate and severe consequences.
It is of interest to note that myocardial infarction (heart attacks) were rare at the start of the
twentieth century; as was cancer. According to the U.S. Bureau of Census, heart attacks caused
less then three thousand deaths in the United States as late as the year 1930. Your lifetime risk of
developing heart disease now is one in two if you are male and one in three if you are female. It
would therefore be logical to entertain the possibility that whatever is causing our cancer
statistics to skyrocket, might also be contributing to, or causing these escalating heart disease
statistics. If we adapt this new ‘scar tissue theory ‘, then both of these anomalies become grouped
together, and could perhaps be construed as one disease.

One could point out that cancer activity can be clinically observed. If it were in fact, a normal
body function, then how come it shows up on tests designed to indicate cancerous activity? In
most cases, the cancer tests show thermal heat being generated. This “heat” being generated, is
then interpreted as the immune system battling with the foreign carcinogen that is believed to be
causing the cancer.( As to why this ‘battle’ did not take place previously while the carcinogen
journeyed to the present post, is dismissed as a ‘mystery’.) However; it could be viewed that this
‘heat’ is not from a fight, but rather, a bi-product of the unauthorized work that is taking place
by this arm of the immune system; namely the cancer cells stimulating the rapid cell division and
inflaming the area with increased blood flow (the lifeblood of these new cells that are being
created.). If there were no activity, the area would operate at body temperature, and register as
cold (not register). It is never observed that a foreign antigen is present. Every cell that can be
observed in the cancerous area is legitimate. Yet the present explanation for cancer is that some
foreign type of antigen has traveled to this location and is causing the DNA of these cells to
lawlessly divide. But neither of these phenomena (the antigen or the cancer cells themselves) has
ever been observed as it flows through the body. The cancer activity can only be observed when
it takes up residency and starts to inflame and stimulate the cell division in a new area. Under the
DNA model, if this ‘heat’ was in fact the immune system objecting to the presence of a foreign
carcinogen, then we could expect to be able to follow this reaction (between the carcinogen and
the immune system objecting to its presence) along its route, and not just when it materializes at
a new site. A pertinent question to ask is; why would the immune system wait until this
carcinogen stopped at a location in the body, before it begins to object to the carcinogen’s
presence? The inability to explain why cancer can travel undetected, is a major defect in the
present DNA model. It is not reasonable to accept that the carcinogen too, is given the same
superpowers and abilities that are awarded to the cancer cells themselves, in order to avoid
detection. The DNA model does not address this anomaly. In fact, when you probe more deeply,
one must question the need for a ‘cancer cell’ at all in the DNA model. If the foreign carcinogen
is causing the proliferation of the cell’s DNA to suddenly mutate itself over and over, then what
is the role for the cancer cell? This tumor growth has already been accounted for. The existence
of the cancer cells is acknowledged, only because they can be observed. As to why the cancer
cells are there, the present DNA model has recognized that they have always been there, and they
are in all of us. Under the DNA model, the reason for the cancer cell is not fully explained. They
are only attributed with the task of spreading this DNA flaw to the surrounding tissue cells. This
appears to be merely an acknowledgment that the cancer cell exists, and then assigning it with a
function. Is there a difference between the cancer cell, whose presence and existence has not fully
been accounted for, and the repair aspect of the immune system, whose presence and existence
can fully been accounted for? The immune system is a legitimate part of the body with a specific
function. The cancer cell is reluctantly also acknowledged as legitimate (because to account for
how it spontaneously came into being without being able to say that it always was there, is too
incomprehensible), and then also reluctantly assigned a function. The cancer cell is deemed to be
fulfilling the same function as the repair aspect of the immune system. If there is no distinction,
then there is no need for both terms. We could therefor use the term ‘cancer’ to represent
something going wrong with the ‘repair aspect of our immune system. (Specifically, when the
system fails to first ascertain that a repair is required, or when the system fails to ascertain that a
repair has been completed and therefor no longer required.) When the immune system starts to
relentlessly divide the surrounding tissues, without this event first being deemed to be necessary,
then this would become a phenomenon that would be labeled as cancer. If it repairs a wound, and
relentlessly fails to stop, then this too is canc