King and Cancer
1.4.2024: The King, wearing a blue tie with boats on it, told another well-wisher that he was “very touched” that she had come to Windsor Castle to see him.
Another told him: “Happy Easter your Majesty, never give in, keep going strong,” to which the King responded: “I just obey my instructions.”
Following the five-minute walkabout, he was driven back to the castle in his state Bentley with the Queen.
"Cancer prevalence in United States, Nordic Countries, Italy, Australia, and France: an analysis of geographic variability."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3708570/#:~:text=In%20Italy%2C%205%2Dyear%20crude,%25%20in%20women)%20than%20elsewhere.Background
It is said that one in two of us will experience cancer in one form or another in the course of our life-time! In the case of England, this translates to around 230,000 cases diagnosed every year and there has been an upward trend in the last fifteen years of about 50%. (See Government graphs below)
Despite improvements in treatment and life expectancy, the statistics seem to suggest that cancers are becoming more not less pervasive, and now figures as one of the five most common causes of death internationally. Some 167,000 people die from cancers in the UK every year.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/cancer-uk-rise-symptoms-diets-smoking-b2488676.html
The recent news that King Charles has been diagnosed with the condition, only goes to prove, disease is no respecter of person or status. It is true however that status and personal circumstance does affect both incidence and outcome, probably to a greater extent than people realise.
It is well known that disease correlates with socio-economic status and cancer is no exception, but some of the relationships are surprising and do not go only one way. So a recent (2022) study could report:
“For those from lower social groups, there was a higher risk of being diagnosed with lung cancer, cervical cancer and stomach cancer. But those groups actually had a lower likelihood of contracting breast cancer, prostate cancer or melanoma. The relationship went in opposite directions depending on the cancer site.”
This suggests that the likelyhood of experiencing cancer, is somehow related to, and embedded in, the style of life and activities. It seems clear there are cancers of affluence as well as deprivation! Generally speaking, those in lower socio-economic groups have a poorer prognosis – that is getting better - but the difference is not great being in the region of 1 – 1.5 across many studies.
Ref. Social Inequalities and Cancer Kogevinas, M., Pearce, N., Susser, M. and Boffetta, P., eds IARC Scientific Publications No. 138 International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, 1997
Cancer Definition
Cancer is essentially the uncontrolled replication of human or animal cells. There are also parallels in plants. The National Cancer Institute definition is as follows:
“Cancer is a disease caused when cells divide uncontrollably and spread into surrounding tissues. Cancer is caused by changes to DNA. Most cancer-causing DNA changes occur in sections of DNA called genes. These changes are also called genetic changes.”
King Charles III
King Charles III's diagnosis of cancer was made public on the 5th February, 2024, at his request. What was initially thought to be fairly predictable enlargement of the prostate, requiring a degree of surgical intervention, has turned out to be something more ominous and potentially debilitating.
A week later he returned to Clarence House from Sandringham 'to continue his treatment', which we must assume is a form of chemotherapy. On Saturday 10th February, the King thanked people for their “many messages of support and good wishes”. He added in his statement that it was “equally heartening” to hear how sharing his diagnosis has helped to promote public understanding of cancer.
That doctors have confirmed that the prostate is not cancerous - carrying with it the risk of spread to bones and other organs - is positive news. The fact that cancer is confirmed elsewhere is not.
The organ or organs affected, the type of cancer, its track record, treatment regimen and prognosis, have not been revealed but the fact that he was not required to remain in hospital and was allowed to go home after only three nights, suggests doctors are fairly relaxed over the condition, in the belief it is treatable, with a good chance of recovery.
At least that is what we hope.
How is cancer discovered?
Cancer in a patient is usually discovered as a result of either signs (i.e. visible or palpatable changes), or symptoms (i.e.interference with bodily systems or pain - though ironically cancerous growths are not painful of themselves but only insofar as they affect other systems). Any of the classic signs of inflammation – pain, heat, redness, swelling lack of function – or other indicators such a rash, coughing or blood where it shouldn't be, may indicate an underlying more serious problem.
Cancer cells also have the unfortunate capacity to shed from the primary site, to other parts of the body, either in the blood or lymph, where they may lodge and grow and do damage. This is is termed metastases or metasasis.
Likely effect.
King Charles has somewhat broken the mould in revealing both the prostate and cancer problems, the latter more so, as he and it will now be under media spotlight, following and reporting on every subsequent twist and turn. The fact the Charles from his earliest years has been subject to, and accommodating of, such attention, may provide little consolation if feeling 'under the weather' for long periods. He has withdrawn from public engagements for the time being but maintained his attention to his other administrative duties apparently. Serious illness could obviously have much profounder personal and constitutional implications.
“Don't speculate.”
The Palace has asked the media not to speculate, but given the basic information and the central role of the Monarch in all aspects of national life, that may prove difficult. There is a truism that outlook is much improved if cancer is caught early. We do not know how long he has had the condition, or how advanced it is, or if the symptoms he has experienced resulted primarily from the cancer or prostate. If the latter, we may presumably conclude in a sense it was fortuitous to have flagged up the more serious problem.
No doubt the open approach, said to encourage others to seek early attention, was discussed in detail beforehand and the disadvantages of openness weighed up. To a certain extent, the privacy most people demand of their health status was sacrificed to prevent the news seeping out in other ways and the speculation that would unavoidably be involved. Better to be up front with the thing from the first? Perhaps he is trying to avoid the circus that surrounded both his father and mother in their final days.
Previous news treatment of royal illness.
In contrast his aunt, Princess Margaret and grandmother Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother kept out of the limelight and very few knew of the terminal illness his grandfather, King George VI, was suffering from until after his death. Indeed some have argued that even the King himself was not told of his condition! Let us hope and pray that is not the case with Charles.
It is a mark of how times have changed that not only was Charles put fully in the picture but he wished the public to be informed as well, though much of the detail remains private. It was apparently Charles wish that his experience would encourage others to seek medical advice early if they were suffering any of the relevant signs or symptoms, and advice agencies have reported this has in fact happened. Whether the NHS is in a position to respond is another matter. The number of people waiting for cancer treatment (See graph below) has never been higher, which does not bode well for sufferers. Charles of course has benefitted from the best treatment at the ealiest opportunity.
Cancer specifics confidential.
The nature and location of the confirmed cancer that Charles is suffering from, has not been announced but the fact that he returned home after only three nights in hospital, indicates immediate surgical intervention was not indicated and that doctors felt he could be adequately treated as an outpatient.
Further his appearance and activity suggest he has not been unduly affected by it to date and that it is of a relatively minor or early stage. He does not smoke, drinks moderately as far as we know, eats well, exercises and is not over-weight, all risk factors important in recovery from any adverse health condition which bode well.
Possible types and locations
Relying on these indicators, some medical experts have suggested bladder cancer likely but other systemic cancerous conditions that might be revealed by routine blood and urine tests may be possibilities. These might include types of Hodgkin Lymphoma or Chronic Leukemia.
Treatment for either of these is dependent on the nature and severity of the condition but usually relies on ingestion or infusion of purposely designed pharmaceutical products referred to as 'drugs', either to control the progress of the illness or irradicate it.
King's views on health.
Charles has always been a proponent of naturalistic and homeopathic remedies, as did his mother before him, so we may assume he has taken his own view of the medical advice he has been given. We do not know whether his return home is as a result of that advice or in contravention of it or whether he will turn to alternative medicine for his recuperative regime. The recent update that he has returned to the capital for more treatment, suggests he is following current and conventional medical best practise.
It is a sobering thought that despite all his advantages and preferential access to medical advice and care – in fact the best an advanced nation can provide – Charles has been struck by the potentially debilitating and deadly condition so soon after assuming the throne. It is possible that had it not been for the prostate problem, it would have remained undetected for much longer.
Having said that, becoming aware of a cancer diagnosis is not without its psychological and social consequences. The treatment regimes, and if he is subjected to them, are not without their own adverse effects. How much all these factors will impinge on his readiness and ability to fulfill his state duties, remains to be seen. According to Buckingham Palace, on the advice of his doctors he will be stepping back from public duties during treatment for the disease but “remains wholly positive about his treatment and looks forward to returning to full public duty as soon as possible.” In the absence of public engagements he intends to continue to oversee state business and official paperwork. Others in the Royal Family, are said to be stepping up to the plate.
Historical aspects.
As we have said, making the cancer diagnosis public, was bound to create media and public interest and concern not only for the King but also in the topic itself. Enquiries to the NHS and cancer charity help lines and to GPs have apparently soared. Cancerous conditions have probably been around for as long as there have been humans but with time has increased its prevalence and profile.
In part it reflects the changes apparent in modern society, as modern medicine and science have sought to unravel and control its mysteries. Much has changed since Sir Percival Pott (1714-1778) in 1775 first linked a cancer – in this case scrotal cancer in chimney sweeps – to an environmental cause, namely chemical elements in chimney soot.
("Chemical analyses of chimney-soot extracts have identified several polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that are genotoxic and carcinogenic in experimental studies. These include benz[a]anthracene, benzo[c]phenanthrene, benzo[a]pyrene, dibenz[a,h]anthracene, chrysene, and indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene (IARC, 1983, 1985, 2010).")
Benzene related chemicals have of course been the prolific and ubiquitous basis of transport for well over a century, and it is therefore only reasonable to conclude that they have been one of the principal causes of environmental cancers.
Soot was the primary cause but friction and absence of washing, not to mention the very essence of the job, were factors, illustrating how in cancer, and indeed any disease, many factors can and do contribute to the overal picture what is called 'multi-factoral aetiology'.
Pott was one of a new breed of medical men who applied a more scientific approach to illness within the confines of knowledge and technique then prevailing. It would of course be continued into the 19th and 20th Centuries, though despite all the advances and improvements, disease and its consequences would remain a significant issue for society and individuals, often proving beyond the wit of man to cure.
But Potts discovery certainly introduced a new attitude that proved helpful, namely that disease was not accidental or resulting from ill-defined supernatural factors, but from named physical ones that could be researched and described, an approach that is still current today.
Environmental cancer agents
Twenty seven specific environmental carcinogens are listed here https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/substances but it is unlikely to be all encompassing and does not fully describe the real life incidence. Many cases – probably the overwhelming majority – occur where it is impossible to demonstrate a relationship to any one or more of them.
Cancer-Causing Substances in the Environment
Despite current talk of 'Turbo Cancers' linked to experimental Covid vaccines, vaccines themselves - a feature of modern life - are not mentioned at all. Certain viruses have a known relationship to cancer and it is there fore not beyond reason that mRSA vaccines created to emulate them, might have the same genetic effect.
"Both DNA and RNA viruses have been shown to be capable of causing cancer in humans. Epstein-Barr virus, human papilloma virus, hepatitis B virus, and human herpes virus-8 are the four DNA viruses that are capable of causing the development of human cancers." (See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1994798/#:~:text=Both%20DNA%20and%20RNA%20viruses,the%20development%20of%20human%20cancers.
Nor for that matter are radiations from isotopes, or X-ray machines, Radar, radio masts etc. that are now ubiquitous. Dietary factors also have proven causative relationships, particulary in respect of obesity, as do drugs, both prescribed and illegal. We shall see if the current craze of 'vaping' replicates the dangers of smoking. Prof. Doll did for smoking in the 1950's and '60's what Pott had done two hundred years before.
The science of cause and effect.
The topic of aetiology, or cause and effect, is complicated and often puzzling. For example although smoking has clear risks including lung and other cancers, about nine out of ten smokers will not die of the disease. This suggests perhaps more than one factor is involved – say smoking and radiation, or smoking and wood dust, or smoking and asbestos, to name but three examples.
In the case of the latter, this might not even involve working intimately with the substance, as environmental asbestos has been ubiquitous from a variety of sources for generations. For decades breathed urban air carried the asbestos fibres released from millions of wearing brake pads for example.
And the substances listed below do not include non-chemical ones. Cancer can also be caused by organic bodily processes inherent in cellular function or inherited genetically from the parent's own exposure to a carcingenic agent, though not suffering from it themselves. Bacteria and viruses have the capacity to cause a cancerous response as does injury and physical aggravation. Many infectious or contagious diseases may have secondary cancers associated to them.
There needs to be much more informed debate on the role of gene-altering therapies, such as the mRNA vaccines, in the incidence of diseases generally and cancers in particular, given the warnings that have circulated prior to their distribution to millions of people.
Given the fact, as we noted, that cancer is basically a malfunction at a cellular level and mRNA vaccines are designed to interfere with cellular 'T' cells, receptors and the auto-imune system, is it not a small leap to infer that in certain cases, this may trigger aberrant cellular responses? Other adverse biological reactions to blood and heart have already been proven.
If Charles and other members of the Royal Family have been persuaded to take these preparations, not once but on multiple occasions, we should not be surprised if they exhibit some of the adverse consequences suffered by others.
I could not help noticing the precipitous decline in the health of both Prince Philip and the Queen following the administration of the vaccine or that both Charles and the Pricess of Wales have both recently suffered serious illnesses presumably following it. Prince Andrew's ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York was diagnosed with malignant melanoma in January, following surgery for breast cancer six months earlier. This is beginning to look suspiciously like an emerging pattern.
The reports of 'turbo cancers' caused by the vaccine, although refuted by the medical establishment, do nothing to alleviate the concern. The overall rise in death rate in all countries with a vaccine roll-out, now well publicised by a brave but isolated few, is certainly indicative of a causal relationship. We shall have to see in the longer term, cancers follow that trend and association.
Conclusion
So where does this get us? We may conclude that in modern industrial society, despite all the improvements in working and living conditions, incidence of various cancers appear to be on the rise. (See table below)
The fact that some societies appear to be free of cancer altogether and that cancer types vary with society, suggest the overall way of living – particularly diet and social habits such as smoking, drinking alcohol, sexual activity, exercise, mental health – have the predominant influence over what disease is likely to be experienced, including cancer. The longer we live, the more likely the diagnosis.
King Charles III is the unlucky and unlikely recipient of a cancer diagnosis. We can but hope that is of a sort that readily responds to treatment and that he will have a full recovery. If any good is to come out of it, an increased understanding of the likely causative factors and a sensible approach to living, besides seeking help and advice, as and when necessary, may be cited as ones.END
The following are screen shots taken from Debi Evans presentation here: https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/uk-column-news-9th-february-2024
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.