“A full embrace of the idea that the origin of cancer lies beyond the realm of genetic mutations will open new vistas on cancer treatment and prevention. Accepting that not all carcinogens are mutagens will strengthen public health policies aimed to prevent exposure to environmental non-mutagenic factors that may promote cancer, such as food additives and plastics and many other toxicants that alter tissue homeostasis.” (Huang et al., 2025)
For decades, we’ve been told that cancer is the result of random genetic mutations. However, researchers are finally starting to acknowledge that this idea does not hold up under scrutiny.
A recent article published in PLOS Biology explains why: many cancers don’t carry the expected “driver mutations,” and some healthy tissues actually do. If those mutations truly caused cancer, why aren’t they always leading to disease?
Some things to know:
- Some tumor genomes demonstrate very little, if any, genetic mutations despite their abnormal characteristics.
- The DNA of completely normal tissues also display genetic mutations, even some that could be considered cancer-causing.
- Abnormal tissues often contain mutations that are considered drivers of cancer, yet rarely progress to actually causing cancer.
- Ionizing radiation doesn’t cause one single mutated cell to grow and take over, as the genetic theory of cancer suggests. Instead, it leads to multiple different cells starting to grow abnormally after several generations. Cancer doesn’t start with one “bad” cell, but from broader disruption in the system.
Several studies have actually shown that targeting so-called “driver mutations” often leads to fast, aggressive cancer relapse and metastasis. This is not because of new mutations.
Even when doctors know the full mutational profile of a patient’s tumor, it has provided little real benefit in guiding effective treatment.
So, could it be possible that cancer is not a disease of genetics, but of cellular dysfunction?
While mutations often accompany cancer, they are not the root cause. Cancer results from broader disturbances in how cells produce energy, communicate, organize, and respond to their environment. We need to move the focus away from genes and toward the terrain: the internal conditions that allow cancer to take hold in the first place.
For example, the famous Warburg effect shows that cancer cells prefer glycolysis over glucose oxidation, even when oxygen is available. This shift reflects a deeper metabolic disturbance, not just a genetic error.
When cells can’t oxidize glucose efficiently in the mitochondria, they produce less energy and more waste (like lactate and reactive oxygen species (ROS)) which creates a stressful, damaging cellular environment. That stress can lead to mutations, but the root problem is metabolic failure.
What should we be focused on instead?
- Restoring healthy metabolic function
- Therapies that restore normal cell function such as progesterone, thyroid, and CO2 therapy
- Getting sufficient infrared light
- Avoiding substances that promote glycolysis (cancer metabolism). Some of these include:
- Cortisol
- Excess estrogen
- Polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs)
- Environmental toxins like BPA, heavy metals, and pesticides
Despite decades of research, no single gene has been proven to cause cancer on its own. Genes like TP53 and BRCA1 are commonly linked to cancer, but many people carry these mutations without ever developing the disease. This suggests that mutations and DNA damage are not the root cause. They’re actually more likely a consequence of deeper metabolic stress. When cells are under metabolic stress, they do not have energy to repair, and genetic damage follows.
“Cells can do only what they are allowed to do by their environment.”
—Ray Peat, PhD (2014)
When we move away from a purely genetic view of cancer, it opens up more options for treatment—things like improving metabolism, lowering stress, and restoring balance. It’s all about the terrain and creating an environment where healthy cells can function properly.