Specific Systems of Treatment
W. Tobey, a U.S. Senator from New Hampshire. Tobey was extremely angry that Lincoln’s work was being ignored, and he said so on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
This aroused the Massachusett Medical Soci- ety, and they sent a team of surgeons and radiolo- gists to Medford, where they talked to some pa- tients sitting on the back porch of Lincoln’s house. Returning to Boston, they claimed to have seen no signs of improvement in the patients while con- ceding that there were some “cases of marked symptomatic improvement,” which they attributed to “the tremendous force of faith and hope.”
Lincoln replied publicly that such a report showed a “high degree of stupidity.” That comment, of course, did little to calm the storm.
The Society demanded his resignation; and when he refused to do so, they expelled him on April 8, 1952.
Then the dean of the Boston University Medi- cal School, whose laboratories always prepared the Lincoln antibiotics, wrote him that the sup- plies had been cut off. The director of the labora- tory had been forbidden to send him any more.
This stoppage continued for 14 days, and it appeared that many people would die. But urgent telegrams from members of Congress got the sup- plies started again, until a separate laboratory could be set up to provide them.
But, when the cultures were turned over to the Lincoln Foundation laboratory, the original cul- ture strains were missing. Fortunately, Dr. Lincoln had some of the original strains stored in other places. Otherwise production would have been completely sabotaged.
Throughout the controversy, no bacteriologists were included in the investigation committees, only surgeons and radiologists.
In January 1954, Dr. Lincoln died. He was in his 60s.
Many believed that the primary problem with his bacteriophages was that they provided an in- expensive method of treating cancer, as well as many other chronic conditions.
Prior to Lincoln’s death, Senator Tobey wrote to over a hundred medical schools, requesting them to send representatives to the Lincoln Clinic, to investigate and study the therapy. In reply, he was told that the Massachusett’s Medical Society was conducting the research, and it would be un- ethical for them to become involved.
Then Tobey turned to the Veterans Adminis- tration, to carry out such an investigation. They responded that the National Research Council ad- vised against doing this.
____________________ JOHN E. GREGOR , M.D., 1945
Note to researchers: Is cancer virus- or bacteria caused? This question needs to be resolved, so more efficient remedies can be found. An investigation of Livingston’s research (to be discussed later) may help determine this.
Working Summary: Several researchers believed that a bacteria caused cancer. Gregory thought it was a virus. Based on the concept that it was a bacteria, Livingston later developed a vaccine—which worked.
Dr. Gregory was another believer in the virus theory of cancer. From 1945, onward, he carried on research in this field, as he stated later in his 1955 book, The Pathogenesis of Cancer:
“[My study] is the result of exhaustive and careful research work, all of which has been repeated by competent men in their fields. The research outlined here has cost the author over $250,000. It is the result of more than 20,000 hours of research in the field of cancer. In the past ten years, forty weeks have been spent at research clinics and at scientific meetings which pertained to this subject.” With such a background of study, one would imagine that Gregory might have something to say on the subject of causative agents in cancer.
Like Royal Rife, Gregory used a high-power microscope to help him in his work. Early ver- sions of the electron microscope had already been invented, and he used magnifications as high as 50,000.
His conclusion was that cancer is an infec- tious disease, caused by a virus.
“[It is] an infectious disease in which the in- fecting organism is a cancer virus, which sensi- tizes cells to grow invasively and metastasize, when stimulated by chemicals, irritants, or ex- cess hormones. An overwhelming infection may produce the disease.” Part of Gregory’s theory was that the cancer virus produces an enzyme which he named chy- motrypsin. But was the cancer virus a product or a cause of the disease?
Gregory said he carried out laboratory experi- ments to fulfill Koch’s postulates [see section on Livingston for a description of Koch’s four postu- lates]. After injecting a malignant melanoma cul- ture into laboratory animals, he withdrew some of the virus from the malignancy which developed in the animal.
The virus withdrawn was the same as the vi- rus injected, thus supposedly fulfilling Koch’s cri- teria. Gregory said he did that 50 times.
Assuming then that the cancer was virus- caused, Gregory looked to antibiotics as the treatment of choice, realizing that virus strains eventually become immune to antibiotics. So Gre-