The Cancer Foundation describes itself in the following words. The Cancer Foundation’s vision is to defeat cancer. The goal is for fewer people in Sweden to suffer from cancer and more to survive the disease…. To get closer to the vision, the Cancer Foundation works with research funding, dissemination of knowledge and advocacy work.
Since its inception in 1951, the Cancer Foundation has distributed several billion kronor to fund cancer research. Since US President Nixon launched the war on cancer, more than SEK 5,000 billion has been invested in cancer research globally. During the same period, the number of cancer patients in Sweden per year has roughly quadrupled. Soon, every second Swede will suffer from cancer during their lifetime. The development is the same in the rest of the world. Provenly, the money roll for cancer research has been a great failure. You have to look for poorer goal fulfillment.
Cancer research has become a large industry that employs hundreds of thousands of researchers around the world. Despite the extremely modest successes, this industry has managed to gain an immeasurably high status by researchers. The most important driving force of many leading researchers is the dream of a patentable preparation for cancer treatment that can make them filthy rich. The entire research apparatus is a self-playing piano that continues to roll out on a spur of the moment, which does not lead to the problem of the rampant cancer disease coming closer to a solution. The majority of the research conducted is based on the so-called Somatic Mutation Theory or the SMT hypothesis, a hypothesis that through recent discoveries has shown major shortcomings.
As this huge research industry and rampant morbidity has also given rise to an even larger healthcare industry for the treatment of cancer, it has come to be of enormous economic interest. The entire cancer industry is a colossus on clay feet, where the interest in finding the causes of the disease and thus being able to slow down the morbidity, has long since ceased. Big Pharma earns excessive sums on today’s dysfunctional cancer care. Every attempt to reverse the trend and to find natural remedies for the sick is frantically thwarted by the interests that live in this industry.
In the book Can medicine be cured? researcher Seamus O´Mahony rejects today’s cancer research and likens it to the trench warfare of the First World War. He believes that the bulk of the research is devoted to mechanistic explanations, instead of to intervention and real treatment of the disease.
The Cancer Foundation is part of the cancer industry
It is against this background that you should see yesterday’s proposal from the Cancer Foundation, where you went out on SVT via your so-called expert Maiju Wetterhall with a TV podcast who listed what, according to them, were myths about carcinogenic foods.
The first alleged myth to be pointed out is sugar, which they believe is not carcinogenic. This statement is a blatant misinformation. We know that a sugary diet is inflammatory and we know that inflammation plays a major role in the development of both cancer and cardiovascular disease. We also know that when a cancer cell has developed, it is completely dependent on sugar (glucose and fructose) for its energy supply, survival and growth, which is not a healthy cell. This was already shown by Nobel Laureate Otto Warburg almost a hundred years ago. It is i.a. the explanation for the fact that diabetes-2 patients have a three times higher mortality in cancer than healthy people. These have a higher blood sugar content than healthy ones and they more often develop inflammation. There is thus no doubt that sugar in every way promotes both the onset and development of cancerous tumors.
The other alleged myth that the Cancer Foundation points out is the sweetener aspartame, which is believed not to be carcinogenic. This statement, too, is a blatant misinformation. There are a number of research studies linking aspartame to cancer. IN a research study it is shown that aspartame is a multipotent carcinogen whose effect is obvious already at a dose of 20 mg per kg body weight, which is far below the recommended limit. A series of studies (Huff 1999; Rall 1995; Tomatis et al. 1989) shows that experiments on mice are relevant for assessing the risk of humans developing cancer, completely contrary to what the Cancer Foundation claims. A number of other studies show the carcinogenic properties of aspartame here, here, here and here and this is just a small, quickly developed selection in the literature.
The third statement from the Cancer Foundation is that acrylamide is not carcinogenic. This substance is formed during frying and frying and has long been considered carcinogenic. In the same way, aldehydes are formed when heating certain seed oils, these are also considered carcinogenic, which I written about earlier on the blog. Although there are occasional studies that try to play down the risk of cancer with heavily heated food, the Cancer Foundation’s disclaimer lacks scientific support.
The Cancer Foundation’s expert Maiju Wetterhall also addresses beta carotene and charcuterie. The fact that the chemicals used by the food industry to produce charcuterie are carcinogenic has been shown on several occasions and this is probably the background to dubious claims that red meat causes cancer.
I have a hard time understanding why the Cancer Foundation in this way plays down obvious connections between diet and cancer. I have earlier wrote about how the fund let its Pink Ribbon campaign be sponsored by the candy company Fazer, maybe you can find an explanation for their actions there. We can only state the gloomy fact that the Cancer Foundation is not to be trusted, it seems more important to be Big Pharma and Big Food in law, than it is to be concerned about all cancer patients.
Despite the fact that for many years I myself was involved in the Cancer Foundation, today I would not donate money to the foundation’s activities. It mostly seems like throwing their contributions down a black hole. And when the money goes to disclaim sugar, then the Cancer Foundation works contrary to its own declared goal.
When I want to support research in this field I send another penny instead Kostfonden. I think everyone else should do the same.
By Lars Bern
Original text: anthropocene.live, The Cancer Foundation misinforms