Superior Index    Go to the next: Chapter 6

Print Files: A4 Size.

Book in Text Format (txt).

Chapter 5
The Theory

     MY THEORY is not presented to give a general scientific explanation of the cancer problem, nor to compare it with the many existing theories and explanations. It is supposed to be a guide which helps physicians to apply the treatment properly. The theory was derived from clinical observations during which was recorded what was most characteristic of the disease and what seemed to be most decisive in the course of the treatment. In short, it is this: What is essential is not the growth itself or the visible symptoms; it is the damage of the whole metabolism, including the loss of defense, immunity and healing power. It cannot be explained with nor recognized by one or another cause alone.

     In my opinion, cancer is not a problem of deficiencies in hormones, vitamins and enzymes. It is not a problem of allergies or infections with a virus or any other known or unknown microorganism. It is not a poisoning through some special intermedial metabolic substance or any other substance coming from an outside, so-called carcinogenic substance. All these can be partial causative agents in man, contributing elements, called secondary infections, etc. Cancer is not a single cellular problem; it is an accumulation of numerous damaging factors combined in deteriorating the whole metabolism, after the liver has been progressively impaired in its functions. Therefore, one has to separate two basic components in cancer: a general one and a local one. The general component is mostly a very slow, progressing, imperceptible symptom caused by poisoning of the liver and simultaneously an impairment of the whole intestinal tract, later producing appearances of vitally important consequences all over the body. The process in the pre-stage of cancer has not been proven clinically. That may be very difficult, even impossible, as liver damage is most probably a predisposition of many other degenerative diseases. In cancer, one or the other liver function may be predominantly more damaged or combined with some other disturbance in another organ. However, we should keep an eye on the liver as the first experiments of Yamagiva and Itchikawa demonstrated that cancer developed, after the liver, the kidneys and lymph glands showed pathological changes. In the poisoning of the liver, clinical symptoms are not noticeable for a long period of time, even for many years.

     "The liver is the largest single organ in the body and is surpassed by none in the multiplicity and importance of its various physiologic activities. Accordingly, the state of the liver and level of its functional efficiency are of great significance to the general bodily economy both in health and in disease."²⁷ The liver weighs seven to ten pounds and has a functional capacity far in excess of ordinary needs. Before the functional reserves are used up, it is very difficult to detect a deterioration of liver function. The liver is a dynamic, active organ, and has manifold functions. Most of these are intimately associated and correlated with the activities of the other organs. It is impossible to test a liver by a single function, even by several, to find the degree of hepatic deterioration. That is the reason why the initial development of cancer remains hidden for such a long time; this interval may be called the "pre-cancerous or pre-symptomatic period." If a person gets nervous, feels weaker, has less energy and loses weight during that time, no physician can make a specific diagnosis as a cancer test does not exist and there is no early specific symptom complex. Physician and patient have to wait until a tumor is far enough developed in one or another area of the body to show local symptoms or signs which can no longer be overlooked clinically. This is when we use all modern equipment such as X-ray examinations, bronchoscopy, cystoscopy, and Papanicolaou tests at every spot where we can reach the different organs. Such symptoms can be caused by smaller or larger destructions with secretions or bleedings from the lungs, stomach, intestinal tract, kidneys, bladder, uterus and other organs or metastatic glands. There may be a great variety of special signs from the brain, spinal cord, bones and other symptoms. Finally, in some cases, a diagnosis can be established only with the help of exploratory operations.

     The scientifically accepted method is that these symptoms alone will be treated locally wherever they appear. That is what we physicians learn and how we are trained in university clinics. All research work adheres mostly to these local symptoms. This is, in my opinion, the reason why decisive progress in cancer treatment has been impeded, especially in the last 50 years, during which modern medicine made remarkable progress in many other fields.

     The local component is caused, in my opinion, by abnormal cells, immature cells, formerly damaged cells, transitional cells when they fall back or are forced to fall back into a type of embryonic life, because they are no longer supported sufficiently by the activated (ionized) minerals of the potassium group and a sufficient amount of reactivated oxidizing enzymes simultaneously united with the normal regulations of hormones, vitamins and the impulse of a normal functioning visceral nervous system. Finally the functions of subcutaneous, reticular lymph cell tissue and reticulo-endothelial system are diminished in function and defense power.

     As mentioned above, the general component is important, and it will be treated. It comprises mainly the deterioration of the essential organs of the digestive tract, chiefly the liver. There, the damage is done by a permanent daily poisoning brought about by our modern civilization. This starts with the soil which is denaturalized by artificial fertilizers and depletion, thus gradually reducing the top soil. In addition, the soil is poisoned by sprays with DDT and other poisons. As a consequence, our nutrition is damaged by a decrease in the important K-group content of fruit and vegetables grown on such poisoned soil. Furthermore, the food substances are damaged as they are refined, bottled, bleached, powdered, frozen, smoked, salted, canned, and colored with artificial coloring. Carrots are sold in cellophane bags after having been treated for better preservation. Other foods contain damaging preservatives; finally, cattle and chickens are fed or injected with stilbestrol to accumulate more weight and be quickly "ready for market."

     If we approach the cancer problem from a more practical viewpoint - the clinical side - based on the concept of totality, we learn two things: firstly, we have to live near nature,²⁸ according to our natural development. Secondly, science cannot help us to solve the deep, underlying cause of cancer.²⁹

     "The most basic property of the heart is that it is a muscle, and the chief property of muscle is that we do not understand it. The more we know about it, the less we understand and it looks as if we would soon know everything and understand nothing." The situation is similar in most other biological processes and pathological conditions, such as the degenerative diseases (cancer). This suggests that some very basic information is missing. The story of myosin may illustrate this point. It seems as if we know too little about the "life promoting substances" Lebensstoffe - as W. Kollath has called them,³⁰ recognizing their enormous importance.

     Albert Schweitzer recognized the greatness of the "awe for life" or the need to have the deepest respect for everything that is alive ("Die Ehrfurcht vorm Leben"). The living being, whether large or small, plant or animal, is in every respect perfectly created or developed, in all its functions and in all its parts, best in its totality.

     Everybody respects and needs science, research, and laboratory work, but their conclusions should not be overestimated. Particularly, the direction of therapeutic action should always be based on the idea of the body as an entity, which has to be supported and restored in its silent perfection.

     It is unnecessary to understand the whole life in its minute biological particles and effect - but it is necessary that, for the problem of therapy, the entire sick human organism be attacked in its totality, especially in degenerative diseases. It would be a great mistake to apply the therapy only as far as we understand the corresponding biological reactions or as far as they can be proven in animal experiments. In particular, in degenerative diseases and in cancer, we should not apply a symptomatic treatment or only one that we can fully understand; we need a treatment that will comprise the whole body as far as we know or can imagine it. These thoughts were well known by the physicians of Greece and Rome; the ancient physicians knew that there are no sicknesses but only sick human beings (see chapter on Paracelsus). The best pharmacologists realize how difficult it is to understand the actions of the pharmaca and often must use practical or clinical experience.

     Modern technology has almost unlimited possibilities but it cannot transfer these accomplishments into the biology of the human being. In The Failure of Technology, Rev. Juenger views our modern civilization as disastrous, almost opposite to the view-point of Dr. Norbert Wiener, who hopes for far greater accomplishments.³¹ He says, however, at the end of his book, "there is much which we must leave, whether we like it or not, to the un `scientific' narrative method of the professional historian."

     This book does not propose to discuss other cancer theories, but I would like to mention the viewpoint of Jesse Greenstein.³² Greenstein comes nearer to a general assumption that "cancer is a phenomenon coexistent with the living process, that will be present for some time to come" or, in other words, "cancer is not a system isolated from the living universe." Despite all these general conceptions, he comes to a somewhat contrary-sounding conclusion for the research work - namely, "that emphasis must be laid on a direct study on the site of malignancy itself." In the edition of 1947, he is very pessimistic about the future in saying that "cancer may only be prevented by preventing human beings."³³ No wonder that such viewpoints, which are more or less generally accepted hinder physicians in seeing the cancer problem other than behind the wall of the symptoms - wrapped up in eternal darkness.

     A few cancer experts start to explore every new method of investigation, then cling to the old scientific research studies. Alexander Haddow, reporting on findings at the Royal Cancer Hospital in London, finally concluded, after being unable to find any promising solution, "As in every other field, cancer research is not only dependent upon a long-range strategy - in this case centered upon patient investigation of the carcinogenic mechanism - but is also affected by chance, the accidental observation, or the unanticipated simplifying principle. Which is likely to be more decisive, it is impossible to tell, yet each is complementary to the other, and both are essential in the advancement of our knowledge of the cancer cell."³⁴

     Here, as elsewhere in the book the assumption is expressed that cancer is one of the degenerative diseases. This is difficult to prove and it is even more difficult to find out why one organism develops this degenerative disease and the other organism develops one or several different types of a so-called degeneration at the same time. In cancer patients, frequently, a combination of several degenerative diseases is observed. I found cancer frequently combined with chronic osteo-arthritis, high or low blood pressure, chronic sinus trouble, or other chronic infections although seldom with arteriosclerosis, except in older people, or associated with coronary disorders, diabetes and rarely with tuberculosis, asthma, skin diseases, gout, etc.

     I think that the origin of the cancerous disease is more probable where the reactivation of the oxidizing enzymes, one of the finest developed functions in the liver, is impaired.³⁵

     This may be the reason why individuals who have inherited a weaker liver-intestinal system get cancer in earlier years, of a more acute or malignant type, with severe allergic reactions, more edema, less tendency to protect the surrounding tissue by a lymphocytic wall or build scar formation later, with and without calcification.

     The experimental causation of cancer, first accomplished by Yamagiva and Itchikawa, through rubbing tar substance on the ears of rabbits for about nine months, is of importance insofar as they found that before the cancer started to appear, the liver was damaged and showed pathological changes, together with the kidneys, spleen and the lymphatic apparatus. The long period was required to poison the liver, before the damaged cells could perform the "mutation" into cancer.

     Another experiment proved that cancer is not a contagious disease. Later, we learned to transplant cancer under special conditions in animals. Leo Loeb was the first who succeeded in inoculating rat sarcoma of the thyroid gland to several generations of rats.³⁶

     The question whether human beings can be immunized against cancer has to be answered negatively. There is no active nor passive immunization thinkable in a body where cancer is growing by itself as a part of its own organism. The type of cancer (mostly virus tumors) against which immunization succeeded do not exist at all in human beings.³⁷

     The first physician who tried to transplant cancer was most probably Dr. J. L. Alibert, a famous surgeon in Paris at the time of Napoleon. On October 17, 1808, Dr. Alibert performed an extraordinary operation at the Hospital of St. Louis in Paris. He took cancerous material from a female breast tumor, broke it into small particles and finally made an emulsion which he injected into himself and three of his students. A severe feverish inflammation appeared and lasted a few days; there was no other reaction. A few days later, Dr. Alibert repeated the same experiment on himself and a colleague - again no other results.

     We know that Napoleon, whose father died of cancer of the stomach, was very much interested in the cancer problem and assumed that he would die of the same disease, which he did. He discussed the subject very often with his physician Dr. Lucien Corvisart.

     In recent years, Dr. E. Weiss of Chicago tried to inject a small amount of watery extract obtained from human cancerous tissue into cancer patients, once a week for six consecutive weeks. The result was an increase in appetite and a slight gain in weight for a short time only.

     From these first experiments and from numerous later ones, we learned how difficult it is to make cancer transplantations effective in the same type of animal and how much more difficult it is to transplant it into other types.

     The question whether the healthy body has the power to prevent its "taking" (incorporation) was neglected for a long time, in the following respect; in general we know that the healthy body has the power to defend itself against invasion by foreign bodies or living bacteria, cocci, viruses, etc. by a defense reaction, or to destroy them after they have entered the body, by an inflammatory reaction as a means of healing.

     I repeat - a defense or healing reaction occurs in the healthy body when cancer tissue or extracts of cancer tissues are injected. However, the reaction was different in cancer patients. There, all different types of experiments had only a minimum or temporary effect, as the cancerous body had lost its defense and healing power.

     Several outstanding authors, such as August Bier, Pirquet, and von Bergmann, thought the malignancies could be included in the problem of the inflammation, since the cancer body could no longer bring about a normal inflammatory healing reaction. In the beginning, Rudolf Virchow thought that the chronic inflammation was also a process of degeneration, while today the inflammatory process is recognized as a mesenchymal reaction, which may turn out to the advantage or disadvantage of the body.

     G. von Bergmann, head of the Medical University Clinic in Berlin and President of the Berlin Medical Association, was the first to examine at his clinic the functional chemical changes in cancerous tissue and cancer-bearing bodies in their reactions, but he did not dare to use these findings for therapeutical experiments. He explained in his book that there are differences in the various types of inflammatory metabolism which were studied in details at his hospital.³⁸ The cells in an inflammatory exudate have aerobic glycolysis even greater than the normal blood leukocytes, while the leukocytes in leukemia have only an anaerobic metabolism.³⁹

     Because of the importance of these findings for the new approach to the cancer problem, i.e., regarding it as a disturbance of the total metabolism and its essential functions, I should like to quote a passage from Dr. von Bergmann's book:

     "Even if a systematic therapeutic use of this idea is impossible at this time, a cancer metabolism starts where the body is no longer able to produce a healing inflammation. It is possible to show distinctly antithesis of the two metabolisms in their reactions. Experiments are made by Ruth Lohmann under supervision of Dr. Kempner which prove that slices of tissue, taken from malignant rat tumors or human cancer tissues, are killed fast in an inflammation exudate simply because the specific metabolism of the cancer cell cannot be maintained in those surroundings. The exact values for sugar, bicarbonate and the acid-degree measured by the pH figure show that no cancer cell can live there any longer. (See Table II, No. 1)"

     "Table 2 clearly shows the quick elimination of the cancer cells in inflammation fluid after a few hours, while they were perfectly able to live in serum. It means that where the inflammation metabolism begins, the cancer metabolism stops and the cancer cells have to die in the area of such a favorable inflammation metabolism with high oxidation power."

     TABLE II - Metabolism of sarcoma tissue after different periods of time in serum and inflammation fluid under aerobic conditions

     Fehleisen (1823), Coley (1892-1919) and others could not enforce a sufficient inflammatory reaction by inoculating infections or infectious material in cancer patients which would produce enough high fever for healing reaction. Drs. Alibert, Weiss, Durovic, (Krebiozen) and others did partially succeed in their long endeavors to produce a sufficient defense reaction in the body by inoculating cancerous tissue or extracts from cancer tissues, infectious materials, etc.

     Thus, we begin to recognize the disease of cancer as a pathological degenerative variation of the total metabolism, similar to variations of other degenerative diseases.

     The therapeutical endeavors concentrate on three essential items:

1. A far-reaching and maintained detoxication.
2. A restoration of the whole enteral metabolism, including the liver, as far as possible.
3. The restoration of the whole parenteral metabolism necessary for inflammatory reactions and healing power.

     The treatment is effective only as long as the liver with the metabolism is restorable.

Footnotes: