30 THE ENZYME TREATMENT OF CANCER
way into general use is still a mystery to me. It was, I believe, first employed by an anonymous writer—still quite unknown to me—in the Daily Mail, somewhere about the end of January, 1906. It caught on, and nothing I could do ever altered the name of the treatment. But with certain other happenings this use of the term “trypsin treatment was a disastrous occurrence. Since early in 1906 I have always used the designation of “ the pancreatic or enzyme treatment.” An “enzyme” is another name for a ferment. Again and again I have insisted upon the fact that a “ trypsin treatment “ of cancer was about the most deadly remedy which could be devised. It is impossible to estimate how many treated cases all over the world have failed from toxaemia owing directly to this use of trypsin without abundant amylopsin.
Particular attention may be directed to the following: The scientific treatment of cancer or malignant disease advocated by me is not, and it never was, a “trypsin treatment.” From the days of its first annunciation— December 13, 1904, and January 20, 1905—it was meant to be of injections of “ the secretion of that important digestive gland, the pancreas “—that is to say, of pancreatic ferments, including both trypsin and amylopsin. I lay no claim whatever to have “ discovered” such a scientific absurdity as “that trypsin dissolved glycogen “—as water also does—or the equally ridiculous one that it was a “ property [of trypsin] without doubt of breaking up glycogen in living tissues” (The Hospital, January 26, 1907, p. 297). I do not, and have not, “ suggested the use of secretin, or erepsin, or enterokinase, along with one or both of the pancreatic ferments mentioned above, just as little as that of soap or chian turpentine. I deal in science, not in domestic commodities. None of these