Otto_Heinrich_Warburg

Nobel laureate Otto H. Warburg, 1931. Dr. Warburg and his research on the cause of cancer in the 1930s is being reconfirmed by modern research.

by Paul Fassa
Health Impact News

Recent research has shown that cancer is basically a metabolic disorder disease.

It’s not genetic. It’s not bad luck. And it’s not a swarm of vicious viruses invading our bodies’ cells.

Cancer cells begin taking over according to poor metabolic conditions in our physiological inner terrains caused by toxic foods and toxic environmental conditions. Then the tumors begin. 

Metabolic disorders of all kinds are the actual primary causes of many diseases, including cancer.

It’s hoped that the most recent massive research that supports the metabolic theory of cancer will lead further to abandoning the existing standard toxic cancer treatments and allowing suppressed natural cancer treatments to be openly allowed to everyone.

The Most Recent Study That Confirms the Metabolic Shift Theory of Cancer Development 

The latest study is titled Inborn-like errors of metabolism are determinants of breast cancer risk, clinical response, and survival: a study of human biochemical individuality. It was published in the journal Oncotarget, a free access journal that is apparently under attack for publishing papers that stray from medical dogma.

This massive study involved over 1200 breast cancer patients studied by an international team of 35 co-investigators from 17 institutions in Brazil, Europe, and the USA. Essentially, it reported that cancer occurs because cancer cells form as a result of normal cells being forced to make and use energy without normal oxygen respiration. (Source)

From the study:

We now recognize that human cancers evolve in an environment of metabolic stress. Rapidly proliferating tumor cells deprived of adequate oxygen, nutrients, hormones and growth factors up-regulate pathways that address these deficiencies (…) all to enhance [cancer’s] survival and proliferation. 

Thus cancer is a metabolic disorder that challenges decades of genomic research and scattered germ theory hypothesis. This leads to utilizing the body’s own mechanisms through food and other natural compounds to help the body restore overall homeostasis and overcome cancer.

The lone USA study author, Robert Nagourney, MD, explained the study’s significance this way:

This suggests that cancer is not a genetic disease arising solely from mutations as we have all been taught, but instead a metabolic condition that develops under the stress of cellular nutrient deprivation.

Cells that cannot generate enough energy due to lack of oxygen (…) use altered metabolic pathways to ensure their survival. Unfortunately, these cancer cells’ success comes at the expense of the host patient. [Emphasis added] (Source)

After comparing precursor markers for different autoimmune diseases and metabolic malfunctions found among the 1200 patients in the study, the researchers considered the potential for using those markers for early diagnosis. 

Findings provide a powerful tool for early detection and the assessment of prognosis in breast cancer and define a novel concept of breast carcinogenesis that characterizes malignant transformation as the clinical manifestation of underlying metabolic insufficiencies. 

That diagnosis would be so early that conventional oncology treatments could be avoided by addressing the metabolic imbalances that create carcinogenicity.

The complete study is accessed here.

Commentary on the Study

Beyond early detection, determining cancer as a metabolic disorder disease confirms the “alternative” natural cancer cures without harmful side effects, which include the following general types:

All of the above and many more have proven themselves in the real world of cancer therapies. And they all holistically address the underlying metabolic deficiencies that create the drastic metabolic shift from aerobic to anaerobic cellular metabolism that ultimately becomes cancer.

See also:

Unapproved but Effective Cancer Cures

These natural cures are marginalized to maintain the lucrative cancer medical dogma of cut (surgery), poison (chemo) and burn (radiation therapy).

Not only are these treatments expensive, difficult to endure, and dangerous, their cure rate of five years without remission is very low, somewhere around five percent depending on which cancer is addressed.

There has been some controversy recently that people with cancer live longer than chemo-treated cancer patients. It’s suspected that many die from chemotherapy, but their death certificates read death from cancer.

Deaths from cancer treatment were even addressed in a recent Lancet article.

All alternative therapies listed above range in the 80 percentile bracket of healing cancer without side effects beyond the five-year survival rate considered a standard for cancer healed.

Many of those who were damaged by standard oncology treatments still manage to safely go beyond the five-year remission standard with “alternative” treatments. 

This threatens the annual multi-billion cancer industry that relies on expensive chemo drugs and radiation treatments. That’s why very little of this evidence-based research will be known publicly, as it has not been since 1930.

That’s when metabolic dysfunction leading to cancer was first observed by German biochemist Dr. Otto Warburg whose research was during the 1920s. He was a brilliant biochemist with abundant research resources who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1931 for creating the Warburg hypothesis of cancer creation through his research.

The Warburg hypothesis states:

Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarized in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar.

Oxygen gas, the donor of energy in plants and animals is dethroned in the cancer cells and replaced by an energy yielding reaction of the lowest living forms, namely, a fermentation of glucose. (Source)

This Metabolic Cancer Information Has Been Around for Years: What’s Stopping Its Use?

There have been a few other studies in the last few years exposing the metabolic nature of cancer. A current spokesman for the movement to spread awareness on cancer’s true nature as a metabolic disease is biochemist Dr. Thomas N. Seyfried, PhD and author of Cancer as a Metabolic Disease.

Dr. Seyfried is an advocate of the ketogenic diet for curing cancer, among other practices. He generously explained in a 2016 interview that: 

The problem today is not that scientists and doctors cannot understand the science; it’s that they cannot accept that this could be the truth behind the nature of the disease, because it changes how you approach treatment. … The information about how to prevent cancer and other chronic illness already exists. It’s just a matter of applying it. [Emphasis added] (Source)

The profit motive of oncology is another sticky issue that cannot be ignored. In spite of the high cost of toxic chemo drugs, oncologists are allowed to buy the drugs they administer in their clinics and offices and increase their prices, even more, to profit from the difference. See:

The Cancer Industry is Too Prosperous to Allow a Cure 

The following video is very interesting. The articulate Dr. Gonzalez was an investigative journalist for Time Magazine before he studied medicine, after which he went on his own to continue and refine the cancer healing protocol of dentist William Donald Kelly. 

This interview really heats up at around the 30:30 mark.

Published on December 21, 2018