I think you're a victim of orthodox cancer semantics.
Let me simplify cancer: If one exposes animal tissue to arsenic, cancer is
simply caused by poisoning -- not 'triggered', or a case of 'cell proliferation'
Parallel re semantic problem: Such language is found also with 'drug abuse',
when drugs are doing the abusing, etc. Its is actually about protecting the
MBalter's reference to 'cancer vaccine', shows he is likely speaking of viral
cause, as reflected in the advertising/media recently -- such as this item I
googled: "ABC News: Texas Requires Cancer Vaccine for GirlsTexas Requires
Cancer Vaccine for Girls. ... must be immunized with the vaccine to help
prevent the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer."
I may be wrong, but I think that when Michael spoke of cancer and cell
proliferation, he was not talking of a virus as cause, but of the fact that
tumours are due to the unchecked proliferation of cells. In fact I thought
it fairly clear from his post that he specifically did not point to a viral
cause? While viruses have been postulated and investigated as cause for some
cancers, surely anyone with half an ear to the medical journals and
scientific press knows that cancer is triggered by any number of agents,
from tobacco smoke to industrial pollutants to viruses.