There have been regular breakthroughs in our understanding of cancer, but little progress in its treatment. Modern research into cancer began in 1940's and 50's when scientists isolated substances that killed cancer cells growing in a petri dish, or leukaemia cells in laboratory mice. Early successes in chemotherapy set pace and received much media exposure, even though they only applied to 5% of cancer treatments at most.

Serving humanity by solving its major diseases has a celebrity status, there is a lot of kudos and an air of Hollywood involved in such things. Cancer research is high profile activity and every now and then a scientific treatment is discovered that gains wide recognition, such as HPV-16 trial, but it only applies itself to treatment of a small percentage of cancers. Mass-media hype is part of problem of how we see cancer. Early discoveries set up an expectation that there was a cure-all treatment, a 'magic bullet' that would make its discoverer famous by curing cancer across world. The idea stems in part from aspirin, original bullet that magically finds its way to pain and diminishes it. Even now boasts of 'paradigm shifts' in orthodox cancer care are exaggerated.

In 1950's and 60's huge and expensive research projects were set up to test every known substance to see if it effected cancer cells. You might remember discovery of Madagascar Periwinkle (Catharansus Roseus), which revealed alkaloids (vinblastine and vincristine) that are still used in chemotherapy today. Taxol, a treatment for ovarian and breast cancer originally came from Pacific Yew tree. A treatment for testicular cancer and small-cell lung cancer called 'Etoposide' was derived from May apple. In 'Plants Used Against Cancer' by Jonathan Hartwell over 3,000 plants are identified from medical and folklore sources for treating cancer, about half of which have been shown to have some effect on cancer cells in a test tube.

When these plants are made into synthetic drugs, single chemicals are isolated and rest of plant is usually thrown away. The medicinally active molecules are extracted from plant and modified until they are chemically unique. Then compound is patented, given a brand name and tested.

In first phase it will generally be tested on animals, second phase will decide dosage levels and in phase 3 it is tested on people. By time it is approved by Federal Drugs Authority (in U.S.A.) or Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulation Agency (M.H.R.A.) in Britain, development costs for a new drug can reach five hundred million dollars, which eventually has to be recouped from consumer.

In addition to 'treatment directed' research such as finding chemicals that effect cancer cells, basic research continues apace, into differences between normal and cancerous cells. In last 30 years this research has revealed much about our nature, but still no cure. Below are some current strands of scientific research into cancer.

antibody-guided therapy: this is original 'magic bullet'. Cancer researchers use monoclonal antibodies to carry poisons directly to cancer cells without harming others.

chronobiology: much of what happens in our bodies is governed by cycles, from female monthly cycle to cycles of brainwaves. Human health depends on interacting cycles geared to acts of perception, breathing, reproduction and renewal. Chronobiology analyses these cycles in relation to different times, such as day and night. Hormones, including stress and growth hormones, have their own cycles. For example they may be at their highest activity in morning and quieter at night. Cancer cells seem to no longer obey same cycle rates as normal cells.

Anti-telomerase: one part of a cell, called telomerase, governs life cycle of a cell and how many times it may multiply. Some cancer cells escape this control and can increase number of times they divide, becoming 'immortal'. Researchers hope to gain control over cancer cells by stopping action of telomerase.

Anti-angiogenesis: secondary tumours (metastasis) can persuade cells around them to grow new blood vessels to feed tumours, supplying oxygen and nutrients for growing cancer. This process is called angiogenesis and research here is finding ways to stop signals to normal cells that start process.

cancer cannot take hold in a healthy immune system

The World Health Organisation (W.H.O.) is promoting prevention as a better option than treatment and particularly targeting smoking as highest recogniseable risk area. The Cancer Research Institute (C.R.I.) is seeking vaccines that support body's own ability to heal. Alternative and holistic approaches seek to do same with diet, nutrition, lifestyle and other choices.

Different philosophies of medicine achieve 'immune support' in various ways not considered by orthodox Western medicine, which concentrates mainly on 'drugs and surgery' as an afterthought to disease, often just adding more toxins and stress to an overloaded system. Alternative treatments take many forms to support body in its own healing process. Although we have constant new biological treatments promised, they usually only apply to a small percentage of cancer types. Change in this field is agonisingly slow and in some cases utterly stuck. Medical science is failing to adapt to new 'quantum theory' sciences that see human body from an energy or 'vibrational' perspective. Western 'allopathic' medicine continues to refuse integration with other, older medical philosophies such as Chinese, Ayurvedic, Tibetan, Homeopathy, Herbalism or vibrational treatment.

In truth we don't even have a research methodology that will cope with assessing different treatment forms and levels tuned to an individual patient. So far it is much easier for orthodox to just deny effectiveness of alternative ways of healing because they do not make rational scientific sense, than it is to extend their model to include other healing models. The fiscal interest of pharmaceutical companies is also a factor in our lack of access to holistic treatments

The complex cancer situation effects us all directly. One in three people in 'West' now gets cancer at some point. Many factors are combining to aggravate acute degenerative disorders such as cancer or heart disease, two top killers in Western World. These expose unwary to dangers and this includes toxic side-effects of allopathic treatments - it is emerging that third biggest killer may be 'allopathic medicine' itself !

The Cancer Research Industry Research shows that in UK every year somewhere between £450 to £500 million is spent on cancer research by pharmaceutical industries, charitable organisations and government. In US an estimated $14 billion dollars (£7.72 billion) are spent. A hard-hitting report published in March 2004 by Fortune, an American business magazine and written by Cliff Leaf, himself a cancer survivor, suggests that for several reasons much of this funding and research is misdirected. He claims that despite a total of $200 billion spent on cancer research since 1971 that mortality rates are basically unchanged. The report was all but ignored by mainstream media.

What if he's right? What is much of this money is wasted? What if research is misdirected? What if much of work serves no real purpose beyond generation of profit? That would mean that cancer research industry is one of biggest bandwagons ever. Despite many more billions spent world-wide on cancer research there seems very little to show for it. After seeing friends and family cut down in their prime by cancer, and its allopathic treatments, this researcher believes that there is something seriously wrong with accepted wisdom on cancer treatment. The author's local health authority has a twelve million pound overspend this year - major expenditure? The cost of cancer drugs. Several situations are combining to make cancer a big risk for us all at this time, despite hard work of many dedicated health service professionals.