This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1900 edition. Excerpt: ...and was then killed, and cancerous growths were found in its lungs. There are not wanting, then, plausible grounds for the hypothesis, that the seeds of cancer may be introduced in some way, which eludes observation, from without; that cancerous growths are strictly parasitic, and independent of the body, excepting so far as they derive their pabulum from its juices. The difficulties involved in this supposition are not greater (as we shall see hereafter) than those which hang over the source and origin of certain entozoa, whereby the body is liable to be infested. But whether this hypothesis be true, or whether the cancer cells and germs are merely morbid elements of the native tissues of the body, developed by some perverted energy of the formative process, remains yet to be determined." While we can hardly claim that the parasitic origin of cancer is demonstrably established, the weight of the evidence is so great that we can scarcely doubt the theory of its production by a microbe. As bearing on the question the views of Haviland, published in 1892, should not be overlooked. He held that cancer is most common in low lying districts, near rivers which are liable to floods, and underlaid with a clayey soil. His recent contribution to the subject in the cancer number of the Practitioner (London, April, 1899), is entirely confirmatory of his earlier publications. He has carefully studied the geography of cancer in England and Wales for a period of thirty years, and he speaks with entire confidence regarding his observations. Important observations have recently been made confirming and extending the views made by him. Noel has made a very careful study of the question, and his conclusions are that cancer districts are either thickly...