Hypothesis of cancer origin from TheCancer.ru

In light of everything I found out about cancer so far this is the theory that fits in perfectly. Please feel free to offer your criticisms if you have any..
Quoted from THECANCER.RU

In August 1986, I put forward the following arguments to explain the causes of cancer. The disease develops under the effect of several factors such as viruses, carcinogens, and ionizing radiation. These different factors have one thing in common – they alter the physicochemical nature of the DNA, in particular, they change its negative charge to positive. Since we know that the DNA consists of genes, it is reasonable to assume that genes carry a very small negative charge, and gene mutation can be defined as an insignificant change of the gene charge from negative to positive. The total accumulation of positive charges, however, may change the DNA charge to the opposite.



In 1987, I read a journal article about the discovery of electromagnetic radiation by the DNA, which I found to corroborate my hypothesis that the DNA carries a negative charge. It is possible to test whether the DNA reverses, if at all, its charge by checking whether or not a cancerous cell has electromagnetic radiation. If it has , my hypothesis is right .

A Theory of Cancer Origins

As I studied oncology-related papers for five years, I tried to trace the relationship between such different cancel-causing factors as viruses, carcinogens, and ionizing radiation.

My attention was captured one day by a report on the results of an experiment conducted on an adult monkey and a baby monkey. The same virus caused cancer in the baby monkey and infection in the adult monkey. It was a surprising discovery, for the virus lacks discriminating intelligence. Suddenly, I saw light. Like a physically charged particle, virus hypothetically tends to be attached to the DNA. The baby monkey developed cancer because its immune system had not been formed completely, while infection occurred in the adult monkey, who had a stronger immunity.

This led me to make an assumption that a virus causing cancer has a positive charge, which is larger than that of the DNA. When it, therefore, attaches to the DNA, it starts to dictate its own division program to the cell.

What remained to find was how and which DNA charge in a cancerous cells reverses. At this point, consideration was to be given to another cancer-causing factor, the carcinogen. I acted on the following basic assumptions:

1. A probable chain of chemical changes occurring in a cell may have the following sequence: protein – carcinogen – cancer. It would be more correct to call the carcinogen in the chain by the name of “free radical,” where a protein molecule is involved. In that case, the sequence acquires the following pattern:







2. It is common knowledge that carcinogen oxides do not cause cancer. What is an oxidation reaction from the physical point of view? It is attachment of negative particles, such as molecules of oxygen or its compounds to a large positive charge. Eventually, the cancer-causing carcinogen attracts the negatively charged oxygen or its compounds from DNA molecules. If, therefore, cancer is, as I assume it to be, a reversal of the DNA charge, this is precisely a change of negative charge to positive charge.

Now, the last, third cancer-causing factor to be considered is ionizing radiations. As is known, this is process in which electrons are dislodged from their orbits under the effect of ionizing radiations. As a result, a great number of positively charged ions, including many in the DNA, is produced. It may be argued again that where the DNA was originally negatively charged, its charge is reversed to positive under the effect of ionizing radiation.

The cell division program attuned to a specific physical DNA charge, in particular, negative, does not work in a different state, that is, positive, and a cell starts to divide chaotically out of control.

An article on cancer published in the September, 2005, issue of News of Science and Engineering (in Russian) suggests that the disease is caused by mutations and other disturbances in scores of genes. Assuming that a gene carries a very small negative charge and that mutation is a slight reversal of its charge from negative to positive, the overall DNA charge may be caused to change from negative to positive.

The fact that the DNA of a healthy cell carries a negative charge was confirmed when, in 1987, the DNA was found to have electromagnetic radiation.

Reversal of the DNA from negative to positive may be verified by determining whether or not the DNA of a cancerous cell carries electromagnetic radiation. If it does not, my suggestion that the DNA charge in a cancerous cell is changed from negative to positive is true.

In late August 1986, I approached the journals Inventor and Rationalization and Chemistry in Life to have my theory, the first hypothesis ever offered anywhere, to explain causes of cancer published under the “Bank of Ideas” rubric.



Tweet