Allow me to rephrase: cancer very clearly is an example of evolution in action.
That’s a bit of an odd statement since viral resistance is more of an issue with RNA viruses than DNA viruses, but other than that, yes, that statement is also basically correct. Development of drug resistance is routinely considered part of viral evolution – because it is.
What on earth are you going on about?
I can’t find the relevant paper but you can see here in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG22BEXscQE&t=1522s
Cancer Stem Cells - Max Wicha, M.D.
They took cancer breast stem cells and grew a cancer in a mouse. At 22mins for a few mins.
Normally they use genetically engineered mice to get a “tumor”, which they want to call cancer, but it is only cells growing out of control and not cancer.
As Dr. Wicha states quite clearly that cancer is an abnormal organ and not just abnormal cells growing out of control. So the genetically engineered mice are not developing cancer. They are developing a mass alright but it is not cancer.
This is the argument that atheists use to say that as there is evil in the world then God must be a malevolent being. Wrong! God is benevolent and all powerful.
Firstly cancer is referred to as a malignant tumor by biomedical scientists and doctors but it is not a true picture.
I would call cancer stem cell mediated immunity erroneously ignited in the body owing to false belief generated by foul game play. The person perceived a possible danger in some area and as a result the body reacts to build a barrier for protection. And we can see this is possible and been show through EMT, epithelial cells gain stemness and a novel organ is built.
If the person can be hassled more and more and particularly if they can be made angry the problem worsens since they believe the theatre of war is in the body.
All this shows is that we have the ability, through our beliefs and reactions to those beliefs to change both function and structure of an area in question in the body. This is because we, as conscious beings, have been made co-creators. We can reverse the problem… easy as, simply by realizing how and why we are reacting. And especially when we can resolve the underlying issues that give rise to ongoing emotional and /or other bodily reactivity. There is nothing malignant about it.
Which atheists? And how does God’s benevolence and all powerfulness show itself?
Not a few biologists. It is the mainstream, almost ALL biologists explain it that way. The official explanation is the cancer clonal evolutionary theory.
This is SMBE, the society of molecular biology and evolution, and they say:
“Understanding cancer from the lens of evolutionary theory is essential to fully comprehend cancer’s behavior.”
.And what about the National Institute of Health’s Library.
.CLONAL EVOLUTION IN CANCER - PMC
“Cancers evolve by a reiterative process of clonal expansion, genetic diversification and clonal selection within the adaptive landscapes of tissue ecosystems.”
It is utter rubbish because we see a lot of new and altered proteins in cancer all of which function and carry out some function. BUT it is the official consensus story on cancer. To say that there are random mutations that undergo natural selection produces the proteins seen is the equivalent of saying you sit a great ape at a grand piano and by random keystrokes it plays for you Beethoven’s ninth or some other masterpiece.
2 posts were split to a new topic: Problem of Evil, God’s Benevolence & Atheism
No it is not!
Evolution is a process of the filter of natural selection working on genetic variation of the genetic material which we pass on to future generations. Cancer is NOT an example of this process in any way shape or form. Cancer is an example of damage to our chemistry (particularly somatic rather than germline genetic material) by a variety of sources like chemicals (carcinogens), radiation, or pathogens.
(see suggestion of a different rewording of the claim below, to which I do not object)
Believe it if you like, but I do not. I am quite sure that the resistance which viruses have to the anti-viral defenses of other organisms is the product of a long history of evolution which evolves many different ways of introducing variation into the genome in a highly controlled manner to achieve highly tuned solutions to particular challenges. That is how the evolutionary algorithm works.
It is all far more intentional than some biologists make it out to be. Intentional but not a matter of intelligent design by a supernatural deity. Where do I get this from? From studies of mutagenesis, which for example find that organisms like E-coli have actually evolved mechanisms to bypass their own DNA repair process in order to introduce variation into their genome.
Incorrect. This is an argument of a THEIST objecting to the monster invented by those using religion for power over other people.
Well THAT is certainly correct! Cancer cells are alive too and also subject to natural selection just as all other living things are. The body has evolved defenses against cancer just as it has against pathogens and so unless a cancer cell can evade these defenses then they will not survive.
SO, if what glipsnort meant to say is that examples of the evolutionary process can be found in the phenomenon of cancer, then I have no objection to that claim. But, it is still very STRANGE to call these examples of evolution, since this is certainly not about the origin of any species – so it might even be better to call them analogies of evolution rather than examples of actual evolution.
What do you define as cancer?
I’m in the medical field. In my experience, oncologists and scientists for Big Pharma by and large do try to do the best for their patients, and many millions survive because of them and because chemotherapy, radiation, and the new treatments work, due to appropriate trials (try Cochrane.org for good reviews, and clinicaltrials.gov to see what ones are going on–though the latter are not all standardized).
I am tremendously glad you did well with the diagnosis you had. I don’t know the particulars, but that is a wonderful story.
Thanks.
I define cancer as stem cell mediated immunity erroneously ignited owing to false beliefs of some possible danger in some area. The body moves to create, through EMT, pluriopotent stem cells that then create a barrier. Indeed the cancer stem cells have many markers (cell surface proteins) of embryonic stem cells. The body can build a barrier by creating a novel organ. Some researchers refer to it as an abnormal or rogue organ. Some only discuss the characteristics, which are clearly the characteristics of an organ.
We see that all solid cancer have the characteristics of an organ. They have stem cells, a basement membrane, connective tissue, blood and lymphatic supply and most also a nerve supply. And all of this is brought about by the cancer stem cells. And there is meaningful communication and co-operation between the cancer cells and the stromal cells as well as immune system cells.
Evolution is the change in the genetic makeup of a population over time (with or without natural selection). It occurs whether the population is of humans or viruses or cancer cells. The same processes apply across the board – mutation, selection, genetic drift, founder effects – and the same tools are used to reconstruct them – phylogenetic inference, tests for selection, demographic inference.
Since I study viral evolution for a living and you don’t, that works out quite nicely.
None of this has anything to do with your claim, which was about development of resistance by viruses (not bacteria) to antiviral drugs.
No it is not correct. And it is inconsistent with what is seen. Cancer is not just a bunch of abnormal cells that are supposedly dividing out of control. Cancer has the characteristics of an organ.
The idea that the body has defenses against cancer is ludicrous. This is only a way that big pharma can justify to the public the use of immunotherapy. The first cells to appear have to be the cancer stem cells. And while they are referred to as cancer stem cells they are a specialized form of pluripotent stem cells created by EMT and not even possibly through any evolutionary process. If it was evolutionary process, then we are talking fish to man in a cool thousand years!
There is no reason for the immune system to attack them. These CSCs then create all the other types of cancer cells AS WELL AS the stroma, the connective tissue of what are called “normal cells”. The ideas put forward that the cancer cell go and recruit other cells like fibroblasts is a joke.
The body’s powerful immune system can protect us against cancer , and is capable of eliminating tumors that have formed. Immunotherapy is a class of treatments that taps into the immune system’s power.
Cancer research institute.
LOL Just because simple models you use in your research are based on such ideas doesn’t make it true. But I will give you that viruses are the simplest of organisms and it could be a mistake to assume they employ complex solutions to problems no matter how long a history of evolution they are a product of.
Oh and the definition you use for “evolution” is fascinating. One can usually come up with definitions of words to prop up almost any claim.
I guess your particular anti-viral research aims at making these chemically from scratch rather than investigating the anti-viral properties of things already made by other living organisms.
Where is the evidence? The immune system is hand in glove with the cancer stem cells that form initially.
id is orthogonal to religion
I am sorry, but cancer are not generally considered as stem cells.
I’d suggest talking to an oncologist for some advice; but best wishes.
Viruses can cause cancers; maybe that’s one thing you’re discussing? They are not organs, per se. I have the feeling you are using an alternate definition for some of these terms,and I’m confused on this.
Best wishes. Thanks
I suggest taking a deep breath and fiiguring out where you fall on the Dunning-Kruger graph. As someone who also works in biology, everything @glipsnort has said is the overwhelming scientific consensus, including the concept of cancers evolving. Selective pressures within the body select for mutations in cancer cells that allow them to divide more quickly, die less frequently from processes like apoptosis, and evade immune responses and drugs. The same for mutations in viruses that confer resistance to drugs and other therapies.
I suggest you read more of what I wrote before you jump to such conclusions.
particularly the last paragraphs of this post
If glipsnort had used the words you just did (concept of cancers evolving) then I would never have objected. But simply saying that cancer is an example of evolution didn’t sound right at all since this is an alteration of somatic genes rather than germline.
And as for the DK graph I shall simply ignore your veiled insults (though I admit that it made me laugh).
Cell lineages are a real thing.
Tongue was firmly in cheek, don’t worry. 
Of course. But just as we draw a firm line between evolution of the species and the origin of life in abiogenesis, this is also different enough for another line dividing it from somatic mutation. At the very least, it is worthy of a modifying term like pre-biotic evolution, perhaps we call it somatic evolution or just the evolution of cancer cells. But I am reminded of the use of the term “evolution” for developments in society and technology. In any case, considerable confusion can be avoided in this way. Not everyone defines evolution as glipsnort has done, and it is certainly the first time I have heard it defined that way.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.