Cancer Is Probably Man Made Caused By Pollution And Diet
Editor's ChoiceMain Category: Cancer / Oncology
Also Included In: Biology / Biochemistry; Nutrition / Diet
Article Date: 15 Oct 2010 - 6:00 PDT
|
|
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
4.38 (42 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
3.12 (17 votes) |
| Article Opinions: | 15 posts |
Why was cancer detected in only one in a few hundred Egyptian mummies? Why is there such scarce reference to cancer in ancient Greek or Egyptian texts? A study carried out by researchers from the University of Manchester, England and published in Nature suggests that cancer, especially cancer among children and young adults is not simply due to our living longer these days - it must be a man-made disease. The scientists say theirs is "the first histological diagnosis of cancer in an Egyptian mummy".
Investigators at Manchester University's KNH Centre for Biomedical Egyptology say their study proves that during the Egyptian mummies' time, cancer was extremely rare. After investigating hundreds of mummies, they came across just one case of cancer - worldwide only two cases have ever been detected. Incidence of cancer, especially childhood cancer exploded after the Industrial Revolution.
Professor Rosalie David, at Manchester University's Faculty of Life Sciences, said:
In industrialized societies, cancer is second only to cardiovascular disease as a cause of death. But in ancient times, it was extremely rare. There is nothing in the natural environment that can cause cancer. So it has to be a man-made disease, down to pollution and changes to our diet and lifestyle.
The important thing about our study is that it gives a historical perspective to this disease. We can make very clear statements on the cancer rates in societies because we have a full overview. We have looked at millennia, not one hundred years, and have masses of data.
Professor Michael Zimmerman, a visiting professor at the KNH Centre, made the first ever histological diagnosis of cancer in an Egyptian mummy. The mummy was said to be an ordinary person, from the Ptolemaic period.
Zimmerman said:
In an ancient society lacking surgical intervention, evidence of cancer should remain in all cases. The virtual absence of malignancies in mummies must be interpreted as indicating their rarity in antiquity, indicating that cancer causing factors are limited to societies affected by modern industrialization.
The investigators examined literary evidence from ancient Greece and Egypt, as well as mummified remains from ancient Egypt. They also carried out medical examinations of animal and human remains further back in history, as far back as the period of the dinosaurs.
They found that:
- According to animal, non-human primates, and early human remains and fossil evidence, cancer was extremely uncommon. One Edmontosaurus fossil of unknown primary origin had evidence of metastatic cancer.
- Virtually all evidence of tumors, which were extremely uncommon anyway, were benign.
- The few malignancies were found were in non-human primates, but none of them are cancers found in modern adult humans.
Some people have suggested that tumors do not preserve well, so evidence of them disappears over time. However, Zimmerman says mummification preservers malignancy features; in fact, it preserves tumors much better than normal tissue.
Of all the hundreds of mummies examined all over the world, just two have microscopic evidence of cancer. Radiologists have examined all the mummies at museums in Cairo and Europe and found no evidence of cancer at all.
Evidence of cancer and medical procedures, such as operations for cancers does not appear until the 17th century, the researchers reveal. Scientific literature depicting distinctive tumors have only been about for the last 200 years, when data started to be documented about chimney sweeps with scrotal cancer in 1775, nasal cancer in snuff users in 1761, and Hodgkin's disease in 1832.
Professor David said:
Where there are cases of cancer in ancient Egyptian remains, we are not sure what caused them. They did heat their homes with fires, which gave off smoke, and temples burned incense, but sometimes illnesses are just thrown up.
The ancient Egyptian data offers both physical and literary evidence, giving a unique opportunity to look at the diseases they had and the treatments they tried. They were the fathers of pharmacology so some treatments did work.
They were very inventive and some treatments thought of as magical were genuine therapeutic remedies. For example, celery was used to treat rheumatism back then and is being investigated today. Their surgery and the binding of fractures were excellent because they knew their anatomy: there was no taboo on working with human bodies because of mummification. They were very hands on and it gave them a different mindset to working with bodies than the Greeks, who had to come to Alexandria to study medicine.
(Conclusion) Yet again extensive ancient Egyptian data, along with other data from across the millennia, has given modern society a clear message - cancer is man-made and something that we can and should address.
"Cancer: an old disease, a new disease or something in between?"
A. Rosalie David & Michael R. Zimmerman
Nature Reviews Cancer 10, 728-733 (October 2010) | doi:10.1038/nrc2914
Written by Christian Nordqvist
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without permission of Medical News Today
MLA
23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/204809.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/204809.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (15)
Correlation does not equal causation
posted by Voice on 15 Oct 2010 at 7:18 amWow. You gullible suckers. If cancer were completely man made then consider the vaccine for cervical cancer. Did man create those viruses that cause cancer? Certainly some cancerous agents are man-made, asbestos, cigarettes, etc. However, this studies suggestions are overreaching, probably so for the sole purpose of suckering newspapers on slow news days. The only thing this study and subsequently this article will accomplish is to stir up more fear and ignorance. Remember "Dr." Andrew Wakefield and his bogus "Vaccines cause autism" paper. Cut from the same cloth.
selection bias
posted by neal s on 15 Oct 2010 at 8:12 amThose who were mummified, are not a typical or representative cross section of people from that time.
They were likely to have been best fed and best taken care of, compared to others then living.
If cancer is due to pollution and diet, then people who are living in pollution free areas with all-natural diets, would have relatively few cancers.
Does testing of such people show drastically reduced
incidence of cancer?
cancer did exist in ancient societies
posted by Paula on 15 Oct 2010 at 8:12 amThis is misguiding information...cancer did exist in ancient societies. What man has made with the polluting agents is TO INCREASE the probability of cancerous cells developing in a human or other mammal body. The production of cancerigenous cells is not a characteristic of modern societies; it is a bio-chemical response of the body, either caused by genetic factors or environmental ones; it seems, from reading this piece of news released from Prof. Rosalie David, to whom I am indoubtly thankful, that PROF. ROSALIE DAVID HAS NOT READ WHAT I WROTE IN MY THESIS, SUPERVISED BY HER and published.
Genetics and Cancer
posted by David K on 16 Oct 2010 at 12:38 amBy looking at what is an isolated historic population, and forming conclusions of about modern one these learned professors make a huge blunder.
For the last 2000 years the population of Europe and Asia has been extremely mobile due to wars, empires and slavery. As the native stocks interbred not only did they share progressive genes but also their regressive ones.
As for tumours being caused by modern living, Oliver Cromwells daughter Elizabeth died of stomach cancer and as Britain's only warts and all leader he was the only one who would have their family history public.
When you make statements based on (Europe) historic populations please compare them against another, our 16 C pre industrial one is still buried in England's churchyards for examination. As a mass examination of our historic population's remains has only been done on on untraceable human remains in a random way, a mass one on known populations who have traceable history's would better support your claims.
Your data is at present is fragmentary and conclusions speculative.
Lifespan
posted by Simon on 16 Oct 2010 at 1:22 amDid they bother to ascertain the age of the mummies? Is it not likely that cancer was absent due to a shorter human lifespan? Neither is it likely they would find much evidence of geriatric diseases such senility, arthritis, etc.
Vitamin B17 argument strengthened
posted by Dr. Richard Werner on 16 Oct 2010 at 6:57 amThis research confirms the contention that many ancient or indigenous cultures not yet suffering from 'modern civilisation' had low incidence of cancer. The argument is that they had a more balanced diet which included bitter substances. Today everything should be sweet. This unfortunately means that nature's anti-cancer substance, 'Vitamin B17', which is a natural form of cyanide that is released only in the vicinity of cancerous cells, has been purged from our diet, because it tastes bitter. Always chew apple seeds, eat almonds not from the US, ideally one or two bitter almonds (now banned in many countries) or the kernels of apricots, prunes, blums, cherries. Also linseed, bamboo shoots, green tee and many other natural plants have B17. But plants of the genus prunus rosaica have a high concentration, ideally bitter almonds or prune/apricot kernels. If cancer is already diagnosed, higher dosage will be required, available in specific medication.
Another possible reason
posted by Dick on 16 Oct 2010 at 1:10 pmThe lymph system is designed to flush toxins and dead cells from the body, but it does not work efficiently without exercise. Could our sedentary lifestyle be part of the cause for the increase in cancer in the last few hundred years?
A different way of thinking...
posted by Tim on 17 Oct 2010 at 6:41 amI totally agree with this article. Cancer is man-made but we must look at more than just pollution for the reason.
Cancer is the product of a fundamental shift in our understanding of nature. All life has a life source, that being the thing that sustains above of all else. Without this life source nothing could exist. If the quality of this life source is degraded then it will lose it's ability to sustain and protect life from degradation. The life source I'm talking about is of course water.
We must try to understand how nature creates high quality water. Water itself could be thought of as a life form... Their is evidence to suggest that water has a 'memory' of sorts. It remembers where it has been, what it has come into contact with and more so how it has been moved.
We all know the quality of our water has a massive affect on our health. We now need to understand the mechanics of water and how nature goes about creating higher quality water.
Cancer is a pathogen.
posted by David Flowers on 18 Oct 2010 at 12:46 pmCancer is either fungal or viral in nature, most likely fungal which by the way fungus in humans has been virtually ignored by medicine and medical science despite the fact that it is the most threatening and deadly pathogen known to all other lifeforms on earth.
Cancer is Genetic, Please stop making absurd claims
posted by Lori Love on 19 Oct 2010 at 7:29 amAll cancer is genetic. It starts within the genes of your cells. It is not all inherited, although cancer causing gene mutations can be inherited.
You can not catch cancer from another person. It is not a pathogen or fungus. Although, being infected with certain viruses such as HPV, HIV, and HEP B does raise your risk of cell changes leading to cancer.
This article only touches the surface about cancer. Dinosaurs have been found with deadly cancer, that was before man, therefore cancer is not man made.
Cancer has always been.
Yes, our diet and lack of exercise raises our risk of getting cancer. So yes, we need to eat healthy, exercise, stop smoking, stop drinking alcohol, and lots of other things. But, we already know that. What are you going to do with that information? That is what matters most.
First 10 opinions shown. For all opinions, click through to the full thread.
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.





