The Conquest of Cancer

THE CONQUEST OF CANCER NATHANIEL I. BERUN* It is now a little more than 7 years since former President Nixon signed into law the National Cancer Act of 1971 [I]. At that time Nixon said, "This Bill can mean new hope and comfort in the years ahead for millions of people in this country and around the world" [2]. This statement is an expression of the public's intense desire for the cure ofcancer and the development ofa simple prevention, or, at the least, the hope that the incidence and the mortality from cancer can be greatly reduced. There is no doubt, as demonstrated by a Gallup poll, that cancer is held to be a "dread disease" and that it is feared by many [3]. Associated with the National Cancer Act of 1971, there arose the phrase "The Conquest of Cancer," but this was not a new phrase. One day, while wandering through the stacks of our library, I came across a section of older books, within which I spotted two books with the title The Conquest ofCancer. The first was by Dr. C. W. Saleeby, a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, which was entitled The Conquest of Cancer, with a subtitle Plan of Campaign [4]. This book was published in 1907. The preface to Saleeby's book says That the war with cancer during the past half century—which comprises practically the whole of the scientific period of medicine—has hereto been conducted on lines all but unprofitable and irrelevant, as the lamentable failure to obtain practical results only too fully demonstrates. I have called this volume a Conquest of Cancer rather than, for instance, "The War with Cancer"—not because I wish to maintain any such monstrously untenable thesis that the disease has been actually conquered, but because I hold that there is abundant warrant for the belief that the new mode of attack indicated and initiated by Dr. Beard gives us the key to the enemy's position, and that as soon as this advantage be pressed home, the conquest of cancer will be an accomplished fact. [4, p. ix] The title "The Conquest of Cancer" was again used in 1 929 by Dr. D. T. Quigley, a radiation therapist [5]. His work was subtitled By Radium ?Director, Cancer Center, Northwestern University, 303 East Chicago Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611. This work was supported in part by a grant from the National Cancer Institute-CA 15145.© 1979 by The University of Chicago. 0031-5982/79/2204-0060$01.00 500 I Nathaniel I. Berlin ¦ The Conquest ofCancer and Other Methods. It is interesting to read Quigley's introduction: "Cancer was known to the ancients as the "stinking death," and this view remains today. . . . The ways ofdealing with the disease and the number of successful treatments perhaps also differ very little from those of ancient time." Another comment on the "control of cancer" which is extraordinarily perceptive was written in 1913: Still another scourge of man has called forth a movement to combat it. This latest recruit in the public health field is the American Society for the Control of Cancer. The new association is unique in that it is attacking a disease the cause of which is unknown and regarding which the ignorance is profound. Its specific task is the education ofthe public to the recognition of the significance ofcertain symptoms and the necessity for early diagnosis and operation. As in the case of many of its sister societies, the initiative has been taken by leading members of the medical profession in America who have called to their side interested laymen to insure the efficiency and success of the movement. It is understood that the pathology of cancer will not be regarded as falling within the field of the new society, but in addition to public education, careful studies will be made of the incidence and distribution of the disease as well as of the results of operative procedure. Ignorance of causation naturally renders the cancer problem more baffling than that of tuberculosis, or the other preventable diseases which the civilized world is now engaged in fighting. For that reason there is, perhaps, the greater need...