Fungi isn't all that bad... seriously

Doug Kaufmann’s article The Role of Fungus in Cancer is an example of the problems that I see with many articles and expert advice that often is exposed to the general public, through mass media that includes the internet, radio, as well as television. My criticism is not to take away from his body of work, nor it a personal attack on his character; however, I have a few qualms about how he has chosen to relay this information about the role of fungus in cancer.

An expert in his field of nutrition, Kaufmann has made some of important points surrounding diet, cancer and fungal infections. In particular, there is indeed evidence that fungus and diet play an important role in cancer. In my own research, looking at dietary supplements and nutritional restriction, I too have found a connection with diet and cancer. My major criticisms of this article, is that Kauffman has largely over-analyzed his findings, making some apparent far-fetched claims, particularly in definitely suggesting that fungus is involved with cancer. I understand this is an opinion, but as an opinion article goes, references beyond 1963 would be nice.

Also because an anti-fungal drug shows an effect against cancer, this doesn’t automatically mean that the fungus caused the cancer, or that, in fact, that a fungal infection might be mistaken for cancer. There are examples of anti-fungal medicine that has anti-cancer properties, separate from their abilities to kill fungus. Rapamycin for example, which was originally found as an anti-fungal drug, has shown to have important anti-cancer properties inhibiting important signaling in numerous cancers including bone tumors and prostate cancer (1,2,3). Many examples that Kaufmann mentioned about patients being put on an anti-fungal medicine which caused the cancer to go away, could very well suggest that the anti-fungal drug had an anti-cancer mechanism as it does that the cancer was actually a fungal infection. Far more data should be gathered before any true claims can be made. Furthermore, an extract from ganoderma lucidum, a fungus that has been used medicinally for years in Asia, has shown to have anti-cancer properties in prostate cancer cells, suggesting that all fungi are not bad.

By simply stating that fungus is probably the cause or even a huge cause of cancer without the proper references could be very misleading. Even though there is evidence to support this finding, there is no evidence that suggests how wide spread this phenomenon may or may not be. Unfortunately, after reading such articles, many people may begin to panic needlessly about something that may not be even a problem, at least not as severe as Kauffman suggests. This panic can cause a lot of problems with healthcare as well, making it difficult for physicians to diagnose properly. What I hope is that physicians and researchers will not take anything for granted, looking down all possible avenues in order to find an eventual treatment and cure for all cancer and other diseases, yet not, with every new finding, think it’s the next best thing since someone thought it a good idea to bring a sharp knife to a big loaf of bread.

1. Chen, J. and Fang, Y. A novel pathway regulating the mammalian target of rapamycin(mTOR) signaling. (2002) Biochem Pharmacology, vol 64, issue 4, pg 1071-1077.

2. Masiello, D., et.al. Combining an mTOR Antagonist and receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of prostate cancer. (2007) Cancer Biology and Therapy, vol 6, issue 2, pg 1538-4047.

3. Ory, B., et.al. mTOR inhibtors(Rapamycin and derviatives) and nitrogen containing bisphosphonates: Bi-functional compunds for the treatment of bone tumours. (2007) Current Medicinal Chemistry. vol 14, number 13, pg 1381-1387