Cancer Research Projects - Are We on the Wrong Track?

Most of the research projects focused on cancer are based on the assumption that cancer occurs
due to abnormalities in DNA sequence and that this happens when the genome within cells of the
human body is exposed to mutagens and suffer mistake in replications. Moreover, it is widely
accepted as a fact and believed by all medical doctors and researchers that the formation of tumors
basically results from cell growths that get out of control. We are being told over and over again that
human genome has different type of genes that control cell growth in a precise way and when these
genes have an error in the DNA code then these do not work properly and are regarded as altered or
mutated. These researches conclude that Mutation of Genes lead to Development of Cancer . A
tremendous amount of resources are poured in terms of money and intellectual contribution from the
medical field to find out a cure for cancer based on the Mutation of genes assumption.
I am skeptical of this very basic assumption in cancer research and would like to float questions to
these qualified researchers and professionals that what if it is the other way around and it is cancer
that causes the mutation of genes and not the genes that result into cancer. My theory is that
diseases like cancer can affect or damage genes. To put it into simpler form, I would reiterate that
Damage in DNA or Mutation of Genes is a symptom of Cancer but not its Cause and
unfortunately most of the current research is focusing on the symptoms and not the root cause. This
could be the main reason why despite all the earnest efforts, the medical field has not been able to
find a cure for cancer. we might be following the wrong suspect here and chasing him for miles
without any solid results.
The questions that come to ones mind are:

We are not able to find a cure for Cancer despite decades of research and spending millions
on Cancer research. Could it be that we are on the wrong track and the research is
misdirected?

DNA mutation causing cancer or is it the Cancer /Disease itself that damages the genes and
causes cancer?

Are we missing something very big here for instance could it be a strain of pathogen,
bacteria or virus that causes most of the cancers? This could be very difficult to trace
especially in case of viruses because many of the virus have this hit and run approach.
These viruses might induce cancer and then vanishing before the disease is caught and this
making it difficult to find a cure?

Page 1 of 6

Ahmad

Can Chemical imbalance in the body? Deficiency of essential nutrients cause cancer?

If the above is true than the cure for most of the Cancer would be in Pathology and not in
Oncology or Genealogy. My suggestion to researchers working to find cure for Cancer would be to
focus more on the Causes of Cancer and less on the Effects or at least take the whole Cause Effect relationship into the consideration when trying to find a cure for Cancer. Mutation of Genes
could be an effect of the disease and not the cause of the Cancer. A possibility exists that there
could be strain of virus or a form of pathogen totally unknown to us and causing Cancer and gets
away unnoticed. Instead of spending millions on Genome projects, Oncology and new Chemo drugs
would it be at least an option to explore the Pathogen Connection?
It is very important that the cancer researchers, oncologists and related medical professionals
explore the pathogen cancer connection in more detail and perhaps start considering DNA mutation
as a possible effect of cancer and not its true cause.

When the world was less commercial, the Scottish scientist Alexander Fleming
discovered a general purpose antibiotic called penicillin which saved the world
from a lot of diseases caused by pathogens. Similarly individuals, I repeat
individuals - sincere individual scientists made vaccines for other ailments and
discovered cures for TB, Polio, Viral Fevers, and Malaria etc. etc. This was the
era when man was less commercial and sincere towards their causes to serve
humanity but as the medical field evolved, commercialism took over and now
look at us we have better medical research facilities and a team of professionals
numbering millions working for these big pharmas and still with all these
resources they unfortunately are unable to find a cure for Cancer. I wish people
like Alexander Fleming and Lois Pasteur were alive today they would have done
something more concrete, too bad that these sincere souls died 100 of years
ago.

The current cancer gene research seems to be taking too much time and without any real
results. I do not want to question the integrity of the medical field professionals but may be they
need to think out of the cancer gene area box. A good example I would like to quote is a recent
Page 2 of 6

Ahmad

article published on BBC where a researcher found out that there is a bacterium linked to bowel
cancer. A simple bacterium and it is just by accident that this was found. If the bacterium is to
blame, then antibiotics might be able to treat it and prevent cancer and no need to spend
another decade on the wild goose chase i.e. cancer gene research projects. Bowel cancer is the
third most common cancer in the UK after after breast and lung.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15333364
There could be simple cures to Cancer cure but unfortunately the current research trend is not
taking these into consideration but focusing more on where there is more money and more
fame.
There is a link between viruses and different from of cancers namely stomach cancer, cervical
cancer etc. etc. and that there are chemicals that are known to be carcinogens. The next step in
my opinion should be to explore more on these causes and their inhibitions for example:

A vaccine that can immune against HPV will save us from cervical cancer. Health
Canada has recommended vaccination of girls at puberty age and hopefully this will result in
keeping this type of cancer under control

Antibiotic against helicobacter pylori (stomach cancer) is working against stomach

cancers and ulcers

Vaccine against Hepatitis is known to work.

Recent studies on Leukemia related virus

Recent studies on Bowel Cancer and the possible link to bacteria.

You would appreciate the fact that many of these cancer- virus link discoveries were accidental and
not the result of a streamlined targetted research. Much of the ongoing research is on Genetic
Mutations and trying to trace the Cancer gene and its behavior. In my humble opinion, it would be
more beneficial and time efficient if equal level of research efforts/resources are put in finding the
viral /bacterial causes of cancer and then finding the right antibiotics and vaccines against them. I
and many others like me feel that too much scientific research effort is focused towards gene studies
and not on the other possible and more realistic known causes like viruses, bacterias and known
carcinogens.

Page 3 of 6

Ahmad

I acknowledge and salute the achievements of the scientific community and it is due to their efforts
and discoveries that today we have eradicated and got a lot of diseases under control and Cancer is
an ongoing battle. I do not approve or support the conspiracy theories and deem them as
detrimental and bad attitude. As pointed out before, I feel that we need to put more research efforts
into the causes i.e. (Viruses, Bacterias, Cancer Causing Chemicals and harmful radiations) and not
just the effects. DNA projects are good but finding a gene link for each illness appears luxuriously
time consuming, why not focus more on the causes and simply eradicate them by better vaccines,
anti biotics and banning the known carcinogens completely.

Cancer & Genome Facts

1. Normal healthy cells are able to undergo around 50 cell divisions (reproductions) before they
die but cancer cells have immortality they keep on dividing (reproducing) in an uncontrolled
manner.
2. Scientists are working and researching on tumor suppressor genes that naturally inhibit the
growth of cancer (tumor) cells. The tumor suppressor genes were discovered when the
researchers were experimenting with rats and induced them with cancer cells. They realized
that the good cells fought the cancer cells and the good genes that resulted in the recovery of
rats from cancer were called tumor suppressor genes. The most prominent of these suppressor
genes are pRb and p53 genes.
3. Over 98 % of the human genome is non coding DNA and the coded DNA also called genes is
only 2 %. This implies that out of the full ocean we are fishing only 2 percent of the known
boundary. This is why I question the effectiveness of this research in terms of unknowns and
the time it would require to research just the 2 % of the total DNA. Please note that even the 2
% is like 20,000 - 35,000 Genes.
4. Cancer cells need oxygen and nutrients to grow new blood vessels and this implies that one
possible solution could be to starve the cancer cells of food or to inhibit the growth of new blood
vessels in the tumor
5. Viruses like Onco viruses are a known cause of Cancer. Genetic (Familial Cancers) are very
rare. Mutagens (Chemicals that induce cancer) are one of the main reasons of causing cancer
and yet you will find that most of the ongoing research is on genetic studies and not on the
other possible causes.

Page 4 of 6

Ahmad

In the end, I would just put forward my hypothesis below and while acknowledging that i have no
medical background and there could be short comings in my argument:
Cancer is not a genetic disease at most but a progressive disease like other diseases.
Genes are not a cause of Cancer but genetic mutation occurs as a result of foreign
elements like Pathogens (Viruses and Bacterias) and cancer causing chemicals also
known as Carcinogens and Mutagens)
The cancer gene and the cancer suppressor gene research are based on experiments on rats
that were artificially induced by cancer cells and the scientists found out that the healthy
genes/cells killed the bad cancer cells. In other words the natural immunity of the rat took over
and defeated the disease. The scientists later attributed the recovery to Cancer suppressor
genes. Following the same logic, I would go further and would say that For every disease there
is Natural Gene that functions to suppress that disease " and these genes result into what we
layman call immunity.
Tomorrow the scientists might discover a gene or a number of genes that are known to
suppress or fight /immune against Tuberculosis, Polio and Leprosy but the fact of the matter is
that we have already found a cure for these diseases in form of anti-bacterial drugs and
vaccines. Imagine if back in time, instead of finding these vaccines and antibiotics we would
have got more involved in finding genetic links and suppressors genes for this disease then do
you think we would have cured or put these under control? I don't think so! If we start digging
each and every diseases on genetic level and get involved in finding diseases suppressor
genes then the chances are that we will be lost in an ocean of unknown. I would like to mention
that only 2 percent of the human DNA has been coded to protein and just that 2 percent amount
to more than 20,000 gene. The rest of the 98 percent cannot be coded to proteins and regarded
as Junk DNA by researchers. This is a bit of a statistical challenge and would require perhaps
another century to explore? There has to be a simpler approach - like one that enabled mankind
to find the cure for other diseases without going into the complexities of genes." In our local
Urdu language we have a proverb that would translate into English as " Sometimes the
philosophers and intellectuals go into such minute details that if you ask them to find the two
Page 5 of 6

Ahmad

ends of a rope then they would fail to do so for they would be too much involved in examining
the twists and turns and the fabric of the rope and would get diverted from their real goal i.e.
finding the two ends

Page 6 of 6

Ahmad