Talk:Warburg hypothesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Confirmation and causation

The claim that this hypothesis has been confirmed by a recent study is not entirely supported by the referenced source. First, it's unclear that the study shows that the metabolic change is the cause of cancer, but it does seem to show that treating the metabolic change can slow growth. Second, the study itself is not an adequate source to determine that the study has been accepted by a scientific consensus; additional sources are necessary to confirm that.

I think it's also a bit confusing to say that this metabolic change is the "primary cause" of cancer. There seems to be ample scientific evidence that inherited genetic traits, acquired mutations, exposure to certain environmental toxins, exposure to certain types of radiation, and exposure to certain viruses, can all cause different types of cancer. See e.g. carcinogen. The question a reader might have, is whether the discovery of carcinogens contradicts Warburg's hypothesis, or if they are simply interpreted as the cause of the metabolic change. -- Beland 15:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)