INTRODUCTION
19
My
theories of cancer, its origin and nature, differ toto caelo from those
advanced by any other observer, living or dead. The theory of the germinal
origin of cancer, which says that a cancer arises primarily from a latent
germ-cell, does not mean that cancer is embryonic in origin or character.
Germ-cells, such as fertilized eggs, give rise to something else than embryo or
soma they produce on occasion trophoblast (asexual generation). I know that
some embryologists, for whom chemistry and physiology have no existence in
their researches, describe the trophoblast of Hubrecht as merely another name
for what they term “extra-embryonic epiblast.” To use the latter term does not
signify anything more than where in normal development the supposed portion of
epiblast lies—i.e., beyond the embryo. I do not agree with them that
trophoblast is epiblastic (embryonic skin) in character, or that their
description of it as “extra-embryonic epiblast “ in any way defines it
embryologically. Their account is merely descriptive, and it gives no
information whatever concerning the chemical, physical, or physiological
characters of this “extra-embryonic epiblast” or trophoblast, which, quite
unlike ordinary epiblast or embryonic skin, eats and erodes the maternal
tissues.
In
very simple words I will now endeavour to summarize what is meant by the
germinal origin and the asexual or trophoblastic nature of cancer. To these
shall be added brief accounts of the reasons advanced six years ago for
employing ”the secretion of that important digestive gland, the pancreas,”
including the two ferments, trypsin and amylopsin, in the scientific treatment
of cancer. It is appropriate that this should be written down on January 20,
1911; the sixth anniversary of the scientific lecture in Liverpool, in which
the more important of these reasons were first announced publicly.