From: fforencich@igc.apc.org
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Date: 23 Nov 92 07:20 PST
Subject: "humans as cancer"
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1466601931:000:17558
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!fforencich    Nov 23 07:20:00 1992


Dear carrying capacity conferees: 

I am seeking to generate some dialogue on the following article. 
(Scheduled to appear in an upcoming edition of "Wild Earth.") 
Let's talk. Note: An extended discussion of this subject will 
appear in an upcoming book by Frank Forencich.


---------------------------------------------------------------- 


Homo Carcinomicus
a look at planetary oncology  

by  Frank Forencich
8467 Sands Rd. 
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110




"The world is an animal."  
			 	
			Plato





	When we think of cancer, we normally think of diseases 
of the human body: cancer of the lungs, breasts, liver and 
prostate. We think of viruses, DNA, asbestos, cigarettes and 
beta carotene. We think of surgery, radiation and 
chemotherapy.
	There may be more to the picture, however; cancer may 
be far bigger than we think.  A paradigm shift is under way: 
Instead of looking at neoplasia strictly as a disease of the 
human body, many of us are now beginning to see it as a 
dysfunction that can affect any living organism or 
ecosystem, regardless of its size. This even includes the 
Earth itself.
	In 1979 James Lovelock introduced the Gaia hypothesis, 
which holds that the planet is a self-regulating or living 
organism.  But if the Earth is a living body then what 
physiological role do humans play? What kind of cells are 
we? Given the state of the planet and exponential human 
proliferation, the answer is shocking and unavoidable: 
cancer. 
	Numerous observers have remarked on the cancerous 
nature of human beings. In Science 13 May, 1955, Alan Gregg 
suggested "that there are some interesting analogies between 
the growth of human population in the world and the increase 
of cells observable in neoplasms."   In 1990 Dr. Warren Hern 
diagnosed the problem in his landmark paper "Why are there 
so many of us?"   Nevertheless, "humans as cancer" has not 
yet become a topic of widespread discussion.  In spite of 
the popular acceptance of the Gaia hypothesis and the rise 
of environmental consciousness, the "humans as cancer" 
metaphor has been largely avoided. 
 

physiology

 
	In fact, the parallels between neoplastic growth and 
human population are astonishing.
  

	* Both are proliferative disorders characterized by 
  	  uncontrolled growth.
  
	* Both tend to spread throughout the "body" of the 
          organism.

	* Both exert pressure on adjacent "tissue."

	* Both continue to grow even under extremely crowded 
          conditions.

	* Both produce chemicals that have negative effects on 
          remote regions of the organism.

	* Both generate new vessels to support their growth.

	* Both fail to "differentiate" in form and function.


	Cancer is fundamentally a proliferative disorder, a 
failure to respond to normal growth controls. This is also 
humanity's problem. Ten thousand years ago there were 
probably no more than five million people on the planet.  
Today there are nearly six billion. The increase in 
population in the last 40 years has equaled the total 
increase from the dawn of the human species until 1950. 
World population is now growing by 10,000 people per hour.
   
	The problem with cancer is not only the reproductive 
output of individual cells, but also in their extraordinary 
longevity. Normal cells have a pre-set, programmed life 
span. They develop, serve their purpose and then die. Cancer 
cells, on the other hand, do not die on schedule and have no 
limit to the number of times they can divide.  They are, in 
a sense, immortal. Because they do not die, cancer cell 
populations continue to rise unless checked by some other 
force. Similarly, the increase in human population has been 
paralleled by a dramatic lengthening of human life 
expectancy. Even worse, we are now seeking to increase this 
to even higher levels, aspiring, it appears, to achieve the 
longevity of the neoplastic cell.

	In a healthy body, normal cells adjust their growth in 
relation to neighboring cells. When population density 
reaches a certain limit, a feedback mechanism known as 
"contact inhibition" causes cell division to cease. When you 
squeeze a normal cell, it stops reproducing. Cancer cells, 
on the other hand, continue to proliferate in spite of 
crowding and grow to much higher densities.   Human "cells" 
exhibit precisely the same characteristic. Population 
density has had little effect on rates of reproduction; 
experts estimate that by the year 2000, there will be 20 
cities with more than 10 million people each. Modern 
humanity, like cancer, seems to have lost its sense of 
contact inhibition. 
 
	Cancer is notorious for its tendency to spread beyond 
the point of origin into other regions of the body. The 
process begins when tumor cells break away from the original 
mass, travel through the bloodstream or lymphatic system, 
attach themselves to new sites and begin growing. In short, 
they "colonize" the new tissue. Human metastasis works in a 
similar fashion. Since Homo sapiens first took form in 
Central Africa some 2 to 4 million years ago, we have spread 
across every continent on the planet. We now inhabit the 
world's deserts, rainforests, grasslands and high mountains.  
We have invaded and affected virtually all planetary tissue 
and we are even making plans to extend our growth into the 
solar system and local galaxy.
  
	The similarity between humans and cancer extends even 
into the details of the metastatic process. In the body, 
cancer cells infiltrate surrounding tissue through a process 
called angiogenesis. A neoplastic tumor secretes enzymes 
that destroy nearby cellular membranes, allowing capillaries 
to penetrate and provide nourishment. At this point, the 
tumor becomes vascularized and begins to grow extremely 
rapidly. On the macro scale, human beings pursue a similar 
strategy. The capillaries are the highways, railroads and 
canals that bring food and raw materials to cities and 
neighborhoods. When human beings colonize a new region or  
district, one of the first priorities is to clear the land 
and build these vessels to facilitate commerce with the 
"body" of the outside world.  Once the roads are built, the 
community is "vascularized" and begins to grow rapidly.

	Cancer and human population are also related in their 
metabolism, the consumption of resources and production of 
waste. In the early 1930s Otto Warburg discovered that 
cancer cells use more glucose and secrete higher amounts of 
lactic acid than normal tissue.   This is analogous to human 
populations that consume high levels of natural resources 
while generating enormous quantities of waste materials.
  
	Another curious similarity lies in the process of 
differentiation. As normal tissue grows, it follows a 
developmental pathway, a genetically programmed sequence of 
changes in structure that lead to a specialized cell or 
tissue type such as bone, liver, connective or neural 
tissue. When cells mature they begin to perform the normal 
functions of that tissue. Significantly, they also stop 
reproducing. Cancer cells, however, are defective in 
differentiation. They get stuck on the developmental pathway 
and fail to develop the unique forms and functional 
characteristics of normal cells. In this sense, cancer is a 
problem of development.

	We see a similar process at work on the macro scale.  
Like cells, human beings also differentiate.  As 
individuals, we develop specialized social roles; one person 
becomes a farmer, another becomes a computer programmer, 
another a poet. We each follow a developmental and 
educational pathway that leads to unique professional form 
and function. Failure to achieve a functioning social role 
can be described as a failure to differentiate. When 
educational quality and economic opportunity deteriorate, we 
too experience a problem of development.

	Human beings also differentiate culturally. A tribe or 
ethnic group develops its own unique rituals, practices and 
world view, a specialized form that makes a unique 
contribution to the human cultural landscape. A variety of 
differentiated cultural forms makes it possible for the 
social organism to adapt to changing conditions. Loss of 
cultural diversity, like loss of biodiversity, threatens 
survival of the larger organism. 

 
prognosis


	When we undertake a comprehensive examination of the 
biosphere, we find it impossible to escape the conclusion 
that the planetary patient is seriously ill, possibly dying. 
The symptoms are severe - ozone depletion, global warming, 
deforestation, loss of biodiversity, topsoil erosion - all 
the result of a rampaging and over-consumptive human 
population. Our major social "organs" are losing their 
effectiveness because of over-crowding; governmental, 
judicial, health care and transportation systems are all 
saturated and near gridlock. The patient is clearly in pain.

	If an oncologist were to make a diagnosis of patient 
Earth, he would probably declare it a Stage IV condition: 
"The tumor is no longer encapsulated; metastasis is 
widespread throughout the body. Little chance for cure, 
although there are some notable exceptions."  Since the 
growth is highly metastasized, it is probably malignant; we 
are experiencing an "oncologic emergency." We must act now.


treatment
 
	When treating a cancerous human body, the oncologist 
generally has three treatment options available - "cut it, 
burn it, or poison it" (surgery, radiation, or 
chemotherapy).  Incredibly, this is exactly what we have 
been doing to the biosphere: cutting, burning and poisoning 
the major planetary "organs." Obviously, we are attacking 
the wrong target; we are behaving as if Gaia herself was the 
disease.  This is like an immune system dysfunction in which 
the body attacks its own tissue.

 	Obviously, we need to target the growth of humanity, 
but for the planetary oncologist, cutting, burning, or 
poisoning the human neoplasm is not a viable option. In the 
first place, genocide would be, at best, a short term 
solution that would not solve the problem of proliferation.  
Even if you could somehow make 2 billion human beings vanish 
from the biosphere, growth would surge to fill the gap; 
after 50 years, the patient would suffer a relapse.  
Moreover, abruptly raising the death rate would have a whole 
host of side effects and repercussions that would endanger 
the patient just as surely as the current crisis.
  
	Instead, we need a treatment that is systemic and 
rehabilitative. The population problem is more than just 
sheer human numbers. Explosive growth rates depend on a vast 
number of social, cultural and biological factors: poverty, 
lack of access to health care, and denial of women's rights 
to name a few. Simply reducing birth rates will not be 
sufficient; the "treatment" must act on several levels. Just 
as a good oncologist will apply a variety of treatments in 
tandem, we too must apply several treatments simultaneously.  
In addition to the obvious need for vigorous birth control 
programs, we must:

	*  completely revise our economic and cultural 
           philosophy away from growth and toward 
           sustainability

	*  slow the metastasis whenever possible with growth 
           control at all levels
	
	*  drastically reduce our consumption of resources
 
	*  re-distribute the wealth between North and South

	*  enhance the rights of women 

	*  devote more attention to the health and welfare of 
           children
 
        *  promote "differentiation therapy," increased 
           educational and economic opportunity for individuals 
           and cultures

        *  protect healthy "tissue," especially wilderness 
           areas, from further invasion
 
	*  moderate our death control efforts: make medical 
           practice more life affirming and less death defying
  
        *  start behaving more like physiological participants 
           in the functioning of the organism
           

	The treatment for this oncologic emergency must begin 
with education and awareness. Oncologists agree that the 
most valuable tool in the fight against cancer is public 
education; the more people know about risk factors and 
prevention, the easier the treatment. What is true for the 
micro level is also true for the macro level; of all the 
treatments that we might use against global cancer, by far 
the most promising is education and ecological 
consciousness. The cure for cancer is awareness of our 
relationship to our "host." 

	The fundamental difference between a cancer cell and a 
human being is the capacity for "host awareness." The 
malignant cancer cell knows only its local cellular 
environment: the chemical and neural impulses that act on 
the cell membrane. A lung cancer cell, for example, cannot 
travel outside its host and discover the totality of its 
predicament; it can only "think locally."

	 A human being, on the other hand, has the ability to 
become aware of her global host. She can get outside the 
planetary body, both literally and intellectually. Through 
travel, study and communication, a person can discover the 
larger organism of which she is a part.  She can see the 
effects of her behavior and the implications for her own 
survivability. Most importantly, she can change her behavior 
to be consistent with the health of the host. 

	Host awareness is vital to the treatment process. The 
more contracted, local or ego-logical our state of mind, the 
more neoplastic our behavior is likely to be. The more 
expanded, global and eco-logical our consciousness, the 
healthier our relationship with the planetary body. Death by 
cancer is not inevitable as long as we pay attention to the 
welfare of the host. Unlike a cancer cell, we can exercise 
personal and political choices. We can understand the ways 
of the host. We can act to save Gaia and thus ourselves.
 
	The biggest obstacle to effective treatment is denial. 
No one wants to talk about planetary cancer; the subject is 
strictly taboo in almost every field of discourse. But 
treatment demands that we overcome the social and 
psychological obstacles that are common to cancer and human 
population growth: fear, procrastination in seeking 
treatment, reluctance to self-treat and denial that the 
condition actually exists. The planetary oncologist must act 
to bring the issue into the public forum.  We must force the 
issue of human population into the spotlight and keep it 
there. 

	As with all cancer cases, time is precious.  If we 
procrastinate in treating our condition, we will be forced 
to face two extremely unpleasant alternatives. On one hand, 
we may have to suffer the extremely high level of 
"collateral damage" that comes with aggressive treatment.  
The longer we delay in controlling our growth and reducing 
our consumption, the more radical the treatment will have to 
be. Drastic measures such as government mandated family 
limits, enforced birth control and severe rationing will 
cause collateral damage in the form of repression, martial 
law, tyranny and widespread social conflict. 

	If, on the other hand, we fail to take action, the 
consequences will be grim indeed. The carrying capacity of 
the biosphere is finite; only so many humans can live on the 
planetary body. If we do not change our behavior, Gaia will 
treat the problem for us. Our death rates will go 
exponential through famine, disease and density-inspired 
violence. The human population will be reduced, one way or 
the other.
 
	The extent and severity of global cancer calls for 
immediate and decisive treatment; palliative or "Band-Aid" 
treatments will not be effective. Unfortunately, most of our 
current environmental action is directed at symptoms, not at 
the underlying cause. Action on air pollution, deforestation 
and recycling is necessary to be sure, but primarily serves 
to relieve the patient's short-term suffering, not effect a 
cure. Without vigorous birth and growth control, our 
environmental efforts will amount to little more than 
"planetary hospice care" - aid and comfort to the dying.

	Accepting the proposition of "humans as cancer" can be 
terrifying and depressing. No one wants to think of himself 
as a malignant cell. No one wants to think of his community 
as a tumor. The implications are intimidating; the specter 
of planetary cancer demands that we reevaluate our basic 
beliefs on such subjects as motherhood, family, growth, 
health, birth-control, social responsibility and criminal 
behavior. This treatment process will be resisted by many 
people, cultures and organizations.

		Nevertheless, the payoff of this inquiry could be 
tremendous. "Humans as cancer" describes us as a disease 
agent, but it also puts us into an intimate relationship 
with the natural world, our host. In this perspective, we 
are not apart, we are of the Earth. We may be defective in 
growth control, but we are nevertheless cells in a larger 
organism. Even as neoplastic tissue, humanity does belong to 
the Earth.
		When we ask the question "are we cancer?" 
we place ourselves in a new universe of relationships and 
possibilities.  Simply by accepting the possibility of 
"humans as cancer," we declare ourselves willing to review 
our most closely held assumptions about who we are, what our 
role is, and what constitutes intelligent and moral 
behavior. This acceptance may be exactly the prescription we 
need to effect a cure.





-----------------------------------------------------------------