Dr. Harold W. Manner: The Man Who Cures Cancer
(Page 4 of 12)
November/December 1978
By Bruce Woods
I don't completely subscribe to the Krebs' theories, however. For one thing their "trophoblast" is definitely an embryonic cell, as they state, but it's a very specific cell . . . part of an extra embryonic membrane. I prefer to call it a "pluripotential cell". The Krebs also suggested that a lack of pancreatic enzymes causes cancer to develop. I think the process is a lot more complex than that, though . . . I believe the pluripotential cells are being constantly subjected to carcinogens, and that these substances cause the normally harmless cells to develop into cancer. In fact, I'd guess that any person who walks the surface of the earth is actually getting cancer at least once a week.
RELATED CONTENT
A Plowboy Interview with Dr. Michael Fox, a spokesperson of the animal welfare movement and opposed...
A Plowboy Interview with Ernest Friedrich Schumacher, founder of the economical model - the Interme...
A Plowboy Interview with Dr. Robert Nara who believes that dentists should spend more time on preve...
A Plowboy Interview with Dr. Kelley—an orthodontist by training—who developed the concepts of metab...
PLOWBOY: And the body is able to control these regular attacks of cancer?
DR. MANNER: Sure, it just throws them off . . . if that body has a healthy immune system. But when a person is weakened through the use of junk foods, stress, lack of sleep, and inadequate exercise . . . that immune system weakens. Then the body catches cold-or any of a number of infections-and, if a cancer starts to develop at that time, the body is not going to get rid of it.
PLOWBOY: Did you immediately begin your laetrile research after you read the Griffin book?
DR. MANNER: No. In fact, I thought the Krebs theory was almost absurdly simplistic. Still, though I tried to put it out of my mind, it did have a ring of truth to it that nagged at me. Finally I talked to my graduate students about it and we decided to subject the trophoblast theory to laboratory analysis. And, while we were rebuilding our lab to accommodate the job, we began to go back to the libraries and bone up on the subject of laetrile. It was about then that I started to realize I was entering something that was different from anything I'd dealt with in 30 years of research work.
PLOWBOY: What do you mean, "different"?
DR. MANNER: Well, most of the published material on the subject-both pro and con was not at all scientific, for one thing. I saw charges and countercharges . . . statements that claimed laetrile was worthless and others which implied that it could cure anything which ailed you. Most of the things we read came from editorials in newspapers and from sensational paperbacks . . . there was very little documentation of scientific evidence one way or the other.
I also realized that something strange was going on when I called several friends who were working in similar areas . . . and as soon as I'd mention laetrile the phone would go silent. They'd just say, "Let's meet." I had more rendezvous in parked cars than a TV spy.
PLOWBOY: And the individuals who arranged these "secret meetings" were researchers?
DR. MANNER: A lot of them were. Many were people from the other universities which were conducting studies that I felt might provide data I could use. This sort of information exchange goes on regularly . . . but not, apparently, when laetrile is involved.
Page:
<< Previous 1 |
2 |
3 | 4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
Next >>