Controlling Cancer: A Powerful Plan for Taking On the World’s Most Daunting Disease (Kindle Single) (TED Books Book 10) Kindle Edition
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Would you like to tell us about a lower price?
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
It's a solid, well-argued work. They mention some oncoviruses that are already accepted by CW including the original Epstein-Barr virus, human papillomavirus, and some hepatitus viruses. From there, they adduce that there are more virus-cancer causal links.
However, just from reading this Single, it's impossible to judge whether their new hypothesis is a wild-eyed pet idea or the next big thing. I'll have to wait for a respectable science reporter to cover the story. Meanwhile, though, the Single format is excellent for this: a small but concentrated blast direct from the primary source. I want 100 more Singles like this!
Unlike other reviewers, I welcomed the cover-to-cover analytic tone. This Single has nothing to say about living with cancer or supporting a relative with cancer. You'll have to turn to other works for that. This Single has everything to say about charting a research direction that may (or may not) save people from developing cancer or even cure people who are diagnosed early enough. That project is immense and will take all the analysis in the world.
Yet the cost of cancer treatment continues to rise. Treating a patient with breast cancer for a year costs about $100,000, for stomach cancer $200,000 and for brain cancer $300,000. Those are the cold, hard numbers.
In this TED essay, Paul Ewald and Holly Swain Ewald contend the conventional wisdom about the cause of cancer is wrong, dead wrong and the key to conquering the scourge once and for all may be to treat the disease as we have learned to treat infectious illnesses such as polio or tuberculosis.
You might call their assertion the "Germ Theory" of what causes cancer. And if you ascribe to their theory, the conventional treatment is to attack some forms of cancer as you would other infectious disease with therapeutic vaccines.
That approach would shift the focus from treatment to prevention - the vaccine that fights off the human papillomavirus is an example - but guess what, the authors say that drug companies know all too well that they make more money on treating disease than preventing it. Holy, cow, that's really taking a cynical view of things but the authors contend money is an undeniable and important factor in how we attack disease.
In discussing their thesis the Ewalds give us strong evidence that therapeutic vaccines have been saving many lives in treating some cancers. One is stomach cancer. They point out that a relatively simple antibiotic treatment is highly effective in preventing and sending straight into remission two different types of stomach cancer. Cervical cancer and liver cancer we also know are caused by germs and new treatment might offer new reasons to hope.
Although as far as researchers know viruses don't cause cancer all on their own, they do act as agents in the chain of events that leads to cell mutation and cancer. And as a result we should be shifting our therapeutic focus and resources in the battle. We ought to be identifying how the Germ Theory can be used to fight other types of cancer.
The TED essay is a summary, if you will, for what the authors say is a forthcoming book about the topic of cancer therapy.
I really appreciate the logic and reasoning behind their argument and the supporting research. I don't know if they're right but their reasoning offers a new view of how we might combat a scourge.
Throughout, however, I was sort of put off by the analytical tone. I learned a lot about research and clinical therapies and the raw economics of fighting disease. I had plenty of numbers and statistics thrown at me.
Fighting cancer is a costly battle, true. It's a clinical effort. Fighting cancer is also a story about people, the victims and survivors and their hopes, fears and perseverance. I wanted to read about some of those heroic struggles and what a new, evolutionary approach to fighting cancer might mean for those people. I think to be more convincing the authors need to make more human their argument.