There has been something leading me into the direction of researching information on a possible link between microorganisms (bacteria and viruses) and their role in causing certain forms of cancer. Based on recent evidence linking microorganisms to not only diseases but to the possible causative agent of several types of cancer, I feel this article is credible for shedding light on this theory. Cancer kills millions of people every year and we need to find out as much information about this health problem as possible.
Unfortunately, it is fair to say that most healthcare physicians are either unaware of cancer microorganism research, ignore the findings or are resistant to the research on it. When certain diseases were initially identified as having a microbe as its cause, cancer didn’t act like an infectious disease and therefore it was concluded that microbes weren’t the causative. There were a few scientists who later found pleomorphic(capable of assuming different shapes) bacteria; these bacteria were simply dismissed as contaminants or as microbes that had secondarily infected cancerous growths. Also, at this time there was no single or consistent type of microbe found and animals experimentally infected with cancer microbes did not develop cancer. Thus for decades before the rise of virology and molecular biology, and a time before the revelation of mycoplasma forms of bacteria, the medical society concluded that bacteria were not involved as a cause of cancer in any way. As a result, this conclusion has stained medical thought about cancer to this day.
It has taken the medical community many years to finally discover the fact that microbes could even cause disease. There was a 200 hundred-year period where physicians knew about microbes, but didn’t realize that they could actually cause disease. In essence for two centuries the dogma was that those tiny microbes could not possibly be a threat to a grown person. Within the medical community once something becomes a dogma, it is very difficult to change medical thinking. Infectious bacteria can usually be recognized in disease because they can be seen microscopically in tissue sections from disease states. On occasion special staining of tissue sections is necessary to make microbes more visible and more easily identifiable. As a side note, in cancerous tissue, the cancer microbe is most easily viewed with an acid-fast tissue stain.
In this era of modern technology and medical breakthroughs, one would think that it would be impossible for disease experts to overlook disease-causing bacteria. An incident took place among legionnaires in Philadelphia in July 1976. This incident was a new and deadly lung disease that struck two hundred twenty-two people in which thirty-four died. The cause of this lung disease remained a medical mystery for well over 5 months. Bacterial infection was ruled out when all tests were reported as negative. One astute microbiologist finally discovered bacteria. Joe McDade at the Leprosy Branch of the CDC, was able to detect unusual bacteria in guinea pigs experimentally infected with lung tissue from the dead legionnaires. A further modification of bacterial culture methods finally allowed the isolation of causative bacteria, now known as Legionella pneumophila.
Another example of dogma-defying research is provided by recent studies proving that ( Helicobacter pylori ) are a common cause of stomach ulcers, which can eventually lead to stomach cancer and lymphoma. Just a few years back, stomach ulcers were thought to be due to stress, lifestyle, or improper diet, and it was not uncommon to send ulcer patients to psychiatrists for analysis. For over a hundred years, physicians refused to believe that bacteria could cause ulcers because they thought bacteria couldn’t live in an acidic environment of the stomach. In the early eighties a researcher, who was unable to convince his colleagues that bacteria could cause ulcers and gastritis. He actually proved his case by drinking a culture of H. pylori. After he became ill and admitted himself to the hospital where these bacteria were found to be associated with gastric disease. These bacteria were found only with a special staining technique and they were indeed found in the stomach lining. The CDC now claims that H.pylori causes more than 90% of duodenal ulcers and 80% of gastric ulcers. As a result, around two-thirds of the world’s population is infected with these microbes. Upon further research gastric ulcers are the prerequisites to stomach cancers.
For some reason, the idea that a proposed cancer germ could have more than one form is a threat to doctors and some microbiologists. The cancer germ has been described as having a virus like and fungus like, as well as a mycoplasma like phase. Such a Life Cycle is deemed nonsense in a lot of the medical community. Several scientists studied the pleomorphic cancer microbe. The results of this research indicate that cancer microbes are best detected by special staining tissue testing. Microbiologists love to separate viruses, bacteria, mycoplasma, and fungi, as distinct entities. In fact there is interplay between all of them. Viruses can infect certain forms of bacteria, but scientists cannot understand how microbes can change into virus-like, mycoplasma-like and fungus like infectious agents. The cancer microbe is related to the bacteria that cause tuberculosis, it is helpful to compare the microbiology of cancer with what we know about the microbiology of mycobacteria and their production of various forms of clinical TB. Research has indicated that the same identical germs do not always cause TB.
As a result, there is no reason to expect all cancer-associated bacteria to be exactly the same germ. Furthermore, just as everyone who harbors H.pylori does not develop stomach ulcers, we should not expect all cancer microbes to produce cancer. Also it is not unreasonable to consider the fact that cancer microbes have the potential to produce disease states that are not considered cancer. Cancer microbes can be identified in various disease states. There are photomicrographs of cancer microbes in autoimmune diseases such as scleroderma, in AIDS related Kaposi’s sarcoma, in breast cancer, in lymphoma and Hodgkins disease, in a lung disease called interstitial pneumonitis, in sarcoidosis and even in skin cancer. Not everyone who becomes infected with TB germs develops clinical tuberculosis. Individuals can harbor the TB germ without ever becoming ill. The same is true for cancer microbes. Not everyone who carries these microbes develops cancer.
One researcher found the microbe to be ubliquitous, which means it is found various disease states and can also be found normally. The research also labeled the microbe a progenitor cryptocides, which means hidden killer. Most importantly, cancer microbes are significant because they can be identified in the cancerous tissue in various forms of cancer. Also a few of these microbes can be seen in normal tissue, but strikingly large numbers can be seen in the areas of the tumor. These same microbes can be found in pre-cancerous conditions, suggesting that these germs are present before the actual induction of cancer. Furthermore, when cancer is cured by radiation and chemotherapy, the microbe can still be found in the damaged, previously cancerous areas. One reason cancer cannot be cured is that we cannot stop the destruction caused by these hidden and unrecognized bacterial elements. The reason antibiotics don’t work well in cancer is because the microbes (in the mycoplasma state) aren’t susceptible to antibiotics.
For more information on cancer and other health related problems visit the website located in the resource box.
The information provided herein should not be construed as a health-care diagnosis, treatment regimen or any other prescribed health-care advice or instruction. The information is provided with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in the practice of medicine or any other health-care profession and does not enter into a health-care practitioner/ patient relationship with its readers. The publisher does not advise or recommend to its readers treatment or action with regard to matters relating to their health or well being other than to suggest that readers consult appropriate health-care professionals in such matters. No action should be taken based solely on the content of this publication. The information and opinions provided herein are believed to be accurate and sound at the time of this publication based on the best judgment available to the authors. However, readers who rely on information in this publication to replace the advice of health-care professionals, or who fail to consult with health-care professionals assume all risks of such conduct. The publisher isn’t responsible for errors or omissions. The Food and Drug Administration have not evaluated these statements. These products aren’t intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.