Quantitative Resolution to some Absolute Discrepancies in Cancer Theories a View from Phage.pdf

a r X i v : 0 7 0 4 .0 4 2 9 v 1 [ q - b i o .S C ] 3 A p r 2 0 0 7 Quantitative Resolution to some ”Absolute Discrepancies” in Cancer Theories a View from Phage lambda Genetic Switch Ping Ao Department of Mechanical Engineering and Department of Physics University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA (Dated: April 3 (2007)) Abstract Is it possible to understand cancer? Or more specifically, is it possible to understand cancer from genetic side? There already many answers in literature. The most optimistic one has claimed that it is mission-possible. Duesberg and his colleagues reviewed the impressive amount of research results on cancer accumulated over 100 years. It confirms the a general opinion that considering all available experimental results and clinical observations there is no cancer theory without major difficulties, including the prevailing gene-based cancer theories. They have then listed 9 ”absolute discrepancies” for such cancer theory. In this letter the quantitative evidence against one of their major reasons for dismissing mutation cancer theory, by both in vivo experiment and a first prin- ciple computation, is explicitly pointed out. To cite: P. Ao, 2007, Orders of magnitude change in phenotype rate caused by mutation, Cellular Oncology 29: 67 - 69. 1 In a forceful article Duesberg and his colleagues (2005) reviewed the impressive amount of research results on cancer accumulated over 100 years. It confirms the current conclu- sion that considering all available experimental results and clinical observations there is no cancer theory without major difficulties, including the prevailing gene-based cancer theories (Hanahan and Weinberg 2000; Prehn 2002; Vogelstein and Kinzler 2004; Beckman and Loeb 2005). Phrasing differently, any known cancer theory is refutable to a substantial degree. While the support for their own advocated chromosomal cancer theory appears strong, it seems that their wholesale criticism on mutation cancer theory is pr