| Author | Message | ||
     Doug Ahart |
Dear Ingrid, You've got a great website. Love it! I have of late come upon what I consider a brilliant theory on cancer, formulated by David W. Gregg, Ph.D.--a biochemist. His website discusses his theories and I am wondering if you are familiar with his views? If not, I would like to know what you think. His website is at: http://www.krysalis.net/cancer.htm Basically what he is proposing is that cancer is caused by cells reverting back to their primitive form of anaerobic metabolism. This can occur for a number of reasons, but he thinks that in most cases, some enzyme is malfunctioning which shuts down the normal cell's aerobic metabolism. Thus, the malfunctioning cell reverts to the less efficient, simpler anaerobic format. This makes the cell ignore it’s normal programmed death and it multiplies rapidly unchecked, along with the other characteristic cancer traits. Gregg is a believer in the high importance of energy in the body and feels whenever the normal Krebs cycle is interfered with, that it is highly probable that the cell will revert to the primitive anaerobic state and opens up the potentiality for cancer. The beauty of his theory is that often the anaerobic cells can revert back to the normal aerobic state under proper therapy. He believes that cancer cells must be oxygenated in order for this to happen. Many of the anti-oxidants along with various phytochemcals, in his view, acts as an oxygen transport system to help provide extra oxygen to cancer sites beyond the hemoglobin system. Also, various phytochemicals can mimic or replace some of the damaged enzymes which started the whole damaged sequence in the first place. Of course, this is a very simple explanation by me, but I think covers his thoughts in a nutshell. At any rate, this theory is the first one, I have ever come across that seems to explain cancer as a whole. I am most intrigued with Gregg's thoughts and it certainly has allowed me to view cancer in a totally new light. I would be interested in your thoughts. thanks | ||
| Ingrid |
Yes, this theory was basically promulgated by Otto Warburg in the 1930s. He received a Nobel prize, but somehow the idea never caught on except in alternative circles. I personally find it explains quite a bit that is otherwise ignored, but there have been countless efforts to refute the theory also. Every cancer is potentially different. I think that when cancer occurs spontaneously, i.e., without any outside aggravating factors, the aerobic/anaerobic theory is quite useful. |
