Warburg hypothesized that cancer cell growth was fuelled by tumor cells producing energy (adenosine triphosphate or ATP) by the anaerobic breakdown or fermentation of glucose.

Whereas healthy cells generate energy primarily through a reaction between oxygen and glucose (they “oxidize” glucose) within the mitochondria of the cell, cancer cells produce energy through the fermentation of glucose in the absence of oxygen. 

The end result of energy production by healthy cells is the production of carbon dioxide, which promotes health by serving as a potent antioxidant and by shuttling more oxygen into cells. 

Conversely, the end result of glucose fermentation by cancer cells is lactic acid or lactate, which can be consistently found in high levels within the bodies of people with cancer.

“Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarized in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by fermentation of sugar.”  – Dr. Otto Warburg

Dr. Warburg made it clear that the root cause of cancer was oxygen deficiency caused by malfunctioning mitochondria. 

But as highly-regarded as he was by his peers, none of them took his finding seriously: It was almost as if they saw him as an otherwise brilliant scientist with a single flaw. 

Frustrated by the lack of acceptance of his ideas, Warburg often spelled out the axiom attributed to Max Plank, “Science advances one funeral at a time.”

It wasn’t until the past decade that Warburg’s work has begun experiencing a resurgence, and publishing activity of scientific papers worldwide has begun to soar. 

It took almost 100 years, but scientists are finally beginning to acknowledge that Warburg had been right all along.

“All normal cells have an absolute requirement for oxygen, but cancer cells can live without oxygen – a rule without exception.” – Dr. Otto Warburg - Modern Research Validates Otto Warburg’s Discovery

Carlos Sonnenschein and Anna Soto of Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston, Massachussets wrote in a study they published in 2000, “We argue that it is necessary to abandon the somatic mutation theory.” 

That was 17 years ago, and the medical establishment is still pushing the outdated, fairytale (yet profitable) story that cancer is caused by genetic mutations.

Note:
(This information inspired me long ago to stop believing in authority and to question everything i'm told.)

Thanks to the research of Dr. Otto Warburg and many others, we now know that cancer is a metabolic disease caused by oxygen deficiency – not a genetic disease caused by genomic mutations.

Homing in on The Root Cause of All Disease

To broaden our understanding of the effects of hypoxia on cells, Dr. Arthur C. Guyton – author of one of the most widely used medical textbooks in the world, The Textbook of Medical Physiology – made this extraordinary statement in 1976:

“All chronic pain, suffering and diseases are caused from a lack of oxygen at the cell level.” - Dr. Arthur C. Guyton

Suddenly, our quest to discover how to prevent and cure cancer, we’ve not only identified cancer’s prime cause, but in doing so we’ve come face-to-face with the possibility that what cures cancer, cures all diseases.

What this means is that cancer and all diseases are metabolic in nature, and remarkably, all can be reversed by restoring the efficient use of oxygen.

 

An alkaline body is an oxygen rich body. Could this be why people who live a phyically active life style or exercise, are generally healthier than coach potatoes? I believe physical activity would certainly produce more oxygen. Being a user of tobacco, we're told that carbon dioxide from tobacco is bad. Note above,  that we're told that the production of carbon dioxide is a good thing.

 

Personal: I was diagnosed with bladder cancer a couple years ago. Of course the first thing the urologist stated was that smoking is the cause. No surprise here. I had an apparently low grade cancerous tumor removed through sugery. Four months later, through a cystoscopy,  three more small tumors reappeared, but  removed at that time by cauterization. Four months later two more appeared. At this time, the doctor stated that he wanted to put me on chemotherapy. I had been doing a lot of research that past four months on how and what to do about my situation. I asked the doctor two simple questions. #1 - Would this chemo  harm good cells? He appeared shocked that I would question him, but answered quickly "yes". #2 - Would this chemo  weaken my immune system making me more susceptible to other illnesses? He again answered "yes" and offered no argument.  
I declined the chemotherapy treatment.  I asked him at this time, would alkalizing the body help my situation? He instantly said NO.

 

I've never been much of a water drinker. However,  I began drinking a lot more water than I usually do with a couple teaspoons of bicarbonate of soda and usually a little pure honey and sometimes a little fresh lemon juice. I also consumed daily a few bitter apricot pit seeds that I had learned had been discovered many years earlier containing  amygdaline.  The next four month appointment for another cystoscopy I pushed up to just over five months. 

 

When I arrived for my next  cysoscopy, the first thing he did before the procedure was to have his assistant hook up the equipment used for cauterization of a tumor which he never previously did until he found one.  I can only assume he knew there would be more new tumors.

He searched for new tumors and found none. On the video monitor, my bladder walls to me looked completely clean. He asked his assistant if she could see anything he might be missing. She said NO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've  long since discovered interesting information on nobel prize winner Dr. Otto Warburg at the End All disease website.

My personal notes are at the bottom of this page.

END PAGE

Apparently, carbon dioxide (CO2)  is a good thing?  Isn't  carbon (C) what everything on earth is made of including humans? Doesn't  every living thing need oxygen (O) ?  Isn't CO 2 what the global warming elites have been telling us for decades now that is destroying the earth? Haven't they been convincing the easily led environmentalists for decades now that we must reduce CO 2 to prevent global warming or "now"  climate change? 

 

Almost 99% of the mass of the human body is made up of six elements: oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus. Only about 0.85% is composed of another five elements: potassium, sulfur, sodium, chlorine, and magnesium. All 11 are necessary for life.  Have people lost their minds with all this anti-CO 2 BS?  OR is it all simply about money and control?$$$$ Think about it...

 

 

 

We the people have been meticulously controlled the past few decades to give up that nasty CO 2 creating tobacco habit. We now have a very small percentage of people that continue to smoke, considerably less than most other developed countries in the world. We now  have overall more deaths from cancers, heart disease and many other illnesses than most developed countries on the planet.

Just a short quick look at a few similar developed countries. See much more information from other links from the main page.
Links #7, 12 & 13. 

Country	life	Smoke %	CHD	AD	Lung cancer	Lung disease
	exp.	males	deaths	deaths	deaths	deaths
Japan	83.70	33.70	30.36	4.23	21.44	4.33
Iceland	82.70	17.00	60.10	34.08	29.45	21.34
Singapore	83.70	28.00	65.19	0.19	23.34	9.43
Sweden	82.40	20.40	71.31	32.41	19.87	12.53
France	82.40	29.90	29.97	25.62	31.46	6.14
United Kingdom	81.20	19.90	60.10	24.35	31.40	21.36
Average --->	82.68	24.82	52.84	20.15	26.16	12.52
Comparison
USA average -->	79.30	19.50	77.97	45.58	35.04	29.68
California -->	80.77	11.70	88.00	30.94	42.00	32.04

Can you see?

Japan uses the most tobacco with the least premature deaths from all four top causes?