Hi, I'm Mark, the author of the Cell Suppression Theory of cancer. To be clear, I never set out to write a new theory. After a diagnosis of skin cancer, my initial aim was to gain just enough insight to help reduce my risk of a re-occurance, by learning about the DNA mutations that allegedly caused my cancer.

Detailed research led to an unplanned outcome and a concerning realisation - that cancer patients are in danger of being misinformed by a well-meaning medical community who seem to have misunderstood the cause of this complex disease.

While learning about a new theory of cancer sounds like a daunting proposition best left to scientists, this isn't the case with the Cell Suppression Theory, because I've translated the science into laymans terms, making this latest interpretation of cancer easily accessible to all. I wrote the theory with the intention to make it readable for family and friends. Never before has such insight been so readily accessible and easy to comprehend.

The remarkable aspect of my journey though, is not the writing of the theory and translation of the science into a readable book, nor even the success of the Cancer Through Another Lens event - which saw me present my theory to a panel of 10 international cancer experts, and debate it's concepts infront of a live audience of just over 200 medical professionals - and neither is it the two literary awards the book has now won; no, the remarkable aspect of my journey is that I have acheived all of this despite not being a scientist. I am a lay person with a degree in graphic design! I fall into the class of Citizen Scientist or Autodidact.

Our multi-award-winning author

But this is where my unbiased, non-scientific and creative background may have provided me with the perfect set of tools to address this most complex disease. Within a design environment we are required to dismiss our initial ideas, and trained to constantly challenge our instinctive thinking to come up with novel approaches to a complex design problem. Going out on a limb, attempting to develop a never-before-created design, and not being afraid of the criticism if it doesn’t work, becomes second nature, failure plays a key part in original thinking. Moreover, a graphic designer needs to be both creative, and orderly, during the problem-solving process and execution those ideas.

This background freed me from cognitive constraints, allowing me to explore possibilities and ideas that others may routinely dismiss. I was open to the possibility of creating an entirely new paradigm and not afraid to challenge established beliefs.

My naivity and creative training enabled me to reinterpret cancer through a different lens, while applying a structured approach to evidence-based data collection and analysis. It gave me the confidence to pursue, develop, and refine a unique interpretation of cancer, even while many around me questioned my sanity for doing so. And as the saying goes...the rest is history.

While medical authorities present cancer as a genetic disease, as if this is already a proven fact, the latest scientific data strongly indicates the established view is incorrect; meaning that mainstream cancer treatments are likely targeting the wrong thing, something all cancer patients should be made aware of before deciding which treatment path to take.

During my research I discovered that there are at least 7 theories of cancer that co-exist. At present, all of them, including the mainstream DNA Theory, remain unproven - that is, none can fully explain all 10 of the Hanahan and Weinberg Hallmarks of cancer, the parameters used to assess the accuracy of any cancer theory. In other words, the cause of cancer is currently unknown. As mainstream treatments are developed from these theories, it makes sense to consider each theory and its subsequent treatments carefully. The greater the accuracy of any given theory, the more effective its associated treatments are likely to be, and vice versa. Given that the DNA Theory struggles to explain most of these hallmarks, it makes sense not to rush into the first therapy offered to you, and take stock of your treatment options.

Many now acknowledge these shortcomings. As a result, complimentary and alternative therapies are often claimed to be more effective. But while there is plenty of evidence to indicate they are, and while many patients following an alternative approach show no evidence of disease despite a prior terminal diagnosis, such as: Dr Nasha Winters, Professor Ben Williams and Jane McLelland to name just a few; I couldn't shake a few niggling concerns that were bothering me. For instance, studies do confirm that natural compounds selectively kill cancer cells, and supporters of natural-based medicine champion their healing properties, but no one could offer an explanation as to how these alternative and complementary options appear to work. Without knowing the mechanism of action, how can we be sure the same treatment would work for someone else? A desire to explain this drove me to develop a coherent answer.

This is where my theory stands out - not only is it the first to provide a plausible explanation for the selectivity of natural compounds against cancer, but it is the first theory to explain all 10 key hallmarks of the disease. This remarkable acheivement indicates I have identified the underlying cause, and that my theory provides cancer patients with unprecedented insight, enabling a more measured and considered approach to treatment that, in all likelihood, has the potential to vastly improve patient survival across all cancers.

"Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere."
Albert Einstein

"Sometimes it is the people no one imagines anything of, who do the things that no one can imagine."
Alan Turing