Cancer is a disease of the whole person, of body, mind and spirit.
We will only deal with malignant tumours. Leukaemia is taken as cancer but more of constraint in lack of other categories.
We now shall look at the difference between science and medicine. A scientist investigates an item and makes conclusions or assumptions about correlations (hypotheses). It is never possible to proof whether these hypotheses are right.
It is possible however to falsify them. After many attempts to falsify a hypothesis without being able to do so, they are taken as theory being used by many scientists in this field.
This does not exclude that they will not be falsified later. This is what happened rather often. It is necessary then to throw this theory overboard. It is not important who falsified it (very often outsiders) or how many people believed in it (science is not democratic in this point).
This is quite different in medicine. Medicine often tries to palliate with science, but there is a big mass of already refuted ideas, because opinion leaders are not willing to correct their mistakes and a majority of physicians follow blindly. One example is the advice to drink much milk in cases of osteoporosis, while the opposite is right. Somebody who tries to use scientific arguments is called outsider or screw. From a scientific standpoint this is not only arrogant but also enormously stupid. It is not necessary to dispute, because: “I do not like it and after all I know everything”.
In a new version good scientific work from developing or fast-developing countries is criticized by: Where are they from? (A prejudice against sub-human beings, in new clothes).
But now to tumours:
In an organ a proliferation starts that do not stop. An old hypothesis talks about mutations in the genetic material. The reason for this assumption had been the fact that by radiation and toxic substances genetic substance is damaged and cancer can be caused. These are the same things that are used in cancer therapy. In 1969 (McKinney 1969) a trial had been performed to remove the nucleus of a cancer cell and transfer it to a (enucleated) healthy cell.
This cell and its descendants stayed healthy. Doing the reverse and transfer a nucleus from a healthy cell to a (enucleated) cancer cell resulted in cancer cells. The trial had been repeated with the same result (Mintz, Illmensee 1975). The feature “cancer” is not located in the nucleus or genetic substance but in cell-plasma.
Mutation theory is definitely wrong. It is repeated in mainstream medicine steadily, however. It is the only foundation for chemotherapy and radiation in cancer treatment.
Another hypothesis (as well being refused) says, cancer cells can disseminate and proliferate in other organs as metastases. If this is right, it should be possible in animal trials to cause metastases by single cells. All these trials failed as long as the animals had not been damaged by radiation or chemotherapy before. Stem cell research showed why. Tumours are not composed from one cell type but, like an organ, of different cells. This already had been known in the 19th century, but seems to have been forgotten. Most cells are harmless cells of the afflicted organ. A metastasis of a colon cancer is not a little colon in liver or lung. A small quantity (1 in 10000 to 1 in 500000) is cancer stem cells (progenitor cells) in all organs. They are dormant, in a kind of sleep. A very effective way to wake them up is chemotherapy (Shaked et al. 2008) and radiation (Lee et al. 2011).
The conclusion from these findings is that metastases occurring after radiation or chemotherapy are caused by this treatment and not by dissemination. The term ‘metastases’ belongs to science fiction, but not to a serious talk about cancer. Since a tumour is mostly composed of harmless cells its size as well as shrinking or growing cannot be a measure for the disease.
If your doctor talks about metastases or mutations: look for a better informed one.