Well, I'm very enthusiastic about what's happening in the cancer field. I think that we are making very substantial progress the most important work. I believe his in the ability to take the questions about human cancer right from the bedside into the most fundamental laboratory inquiry. We have human cancer cells now in test tube just like we used to have bacteria in the test tube and that's what led to the great dead development and chemotherapy and antibiotic therapy. We also have developed a beautiful model systems in which we can ask questions about cancer. There is a fundamental nature and I think that these enquiries will ultimately Conquer Cancer and I mean by that make it possible for us to prevent most Cancers and to treat effectively those that do occur. We're seeing real advances in theTreatment of cancer through surgery or radiation chemotherapy. We're seeing the beginning of just the Todd Ling steps of the development of an immunologic approach to cancer is in the human logical sphere. One of the things that is most encouraging is that are at our institution. Dr. Lloyd old and his collaborators have now showed with any question that certain kinds of cancer have antigens that is covering substances at their surface that are foreign to the body and those antigens it around me cancer cells may be specific for an individual cancer like one particular melanoma or leave a brain tumor or read different kinds of kidney tumor and ovarian tumors. These are the ones that have already been the questions of already been asked about their summer. There are groups Pacific foreign substances on cancer.And Then There are a variety of other antigens like differentiation antigens and antigens that are REM that are wrecked what I call illegitimate blood group antigens that are present and can act as a target for the immunological attack on cancer. That means an attack that may permit early detection cancer vaccine and and immunotherapy really specific directed immunotherapyMany people have wondered why we haven't solved the cancer problem in the seven years since the conquest of cancer program where the war on cancer was was launched. And I think that is just simply a question of we knew so little about cancer and we still do not know enough about cancer. So that many discoveries are necessary and one can't predict the Temple of Discovery when we went when we as a nation went to the moon. We had every single fact that we needed to go to the moon at the time. We started that 10 year program with cancer. It's still a matter of learning about the disease. So we have the fundamental basic knowledge necessary for rent for addressing cancer in the most effective weight, and I'm very excited about several directions of my own research and experimental systems. I have been able to completely prevent breast cancer in experimental animals simply by dietary manipulation. If you cut the calories that my steak in that have a virus that causes of cancer have the right genetic makeup to cause to lead to the cancer and have a hormonal makeup that permits the expression of the cancer you completely prevent by just cutting the calorie completely prevent breast cancer has an incident ordinarily of 72 80% Absolutely zero, you can't directly extrapolate that discovery. From the mice to humans, but you can analyze that sort of thing and fundamental terms fundamental cellular terms molecular terms hormonal terms that may give us a way of delivering this kind of thing for a human benefit and will ultimately lead to studies of the influence of nutriment sign Cancer and other area of investigation that I find very attractive is an area that is that we're just beginning ready to explore in a definitive terms. And that is the area of the influence of Trace metals on the immunological function. You see with cancer many many times the immunity system is what is defective and most of my patients as Memorial Hospital who died of cancer don't die of cancer at all that I have infection and this is because the immunity system is weakened. In some way by the cancer, we have found that many of those patients have deficiencies in there levels of the of zinc a simple element. We have found in laboratory studies that sink is essential to all of the functions of the thymus today production of hormones by the X to the production of cells by the time is essential for the Integrity of the immunity system in the thigh. Michigan is in Oregon with our maintaining ourselves as individuals in the sea of bacteria of fungi and viruses that we have chosen as a real logical Mitch you want to use that phrase to describe human beings that we're all suspended in a we are organisms are very hostile. And even the ones that aren't so hostel become very hostile if our immunity System is not bigger. I want to talk for a moment about diet because really officials at the National Cancer Institute as I'm sure you're aware. We're criticized rather roundly by some members of Congress most notably Senator George McGovern for not pursuing research in the area of diet and its relationship to cancer and I wonder if you could comment about that but I think it's a little bit unfortunate when the politicians begin to try to tell the scientist the best lead in the best things to to pursue. I think it's very important that they think about them but to try to tell him the best please I'm working in nutrition and I'm very much interested in the nutrition the influences of nutrition on cancer. I think there's some tremendous possibilities, but I think that's far the best science in addressing cancer may not be the nutritional approach him. What we have to do is to it is to go where the money is in science. Enter pursue the lines of investigation that seemed the most promising at the present time. I think it's very important to pursue work on nutrition. But I think here again, we've got to have the very best questions and the nutrition field is a little fatty and I think you'll be but we have to be careful that we don't just go off the deep end in this area and ended at week. I do pursue the molecular aspects of cancer. This is one of the things that sounded like it from the newspaper reports. Miss McGovern was criticizing was he said the viral logical approach to cancer has been very wasteful. Well, it is delete that is permitting us to probe the very chemistry of the cancer cell and because viruses can produce the cancer has changed himself how that works. Maybe viruses are in a major cause of cancer in man. I don't know that yet that is answer isn't On that but the viruses are the very best pro at the how cancers occur and we also use chemical carcinogenesis carcinogens to approve this the same question, but they're more difficult to trace and their influence the footprints and fingerprints are not so clear as we work out the the the problem with cancer. So what I think is it we've got to look at this in a in a in a little broader a perspective so far in the conquest of cancer program supported by the government. There have been about 5 billion dollars spent on cancer research. That's a lot of money. But according to many other kinds of programs with lots of Hardware, it isn't so expensive and cancer is such a major problem. It's killing in the neighborhood. What is Kelly more than 300,000 between three and four hundred thousand Americans every year and it really deserves our very best scientific attention and we've got to provide the support for the research who government resources, but also through the through the private sector wizard culture have to be committed to win this war and not only against cancer but also against heart disease and stroke and the other diseases. I think that science has supported allowed to develop its potentiality. It's going to be impossible to prevent most of those things. We currently call disease when you were here in Minnesota back in 1972-73. You made the statement that Cancer maybe and correct me if I'm misinterpreting it cancer, maybe the body's logical response to proceeding past the age of reproduction and I'm wondering if our efforts to Conquer Cancer may be almost misdirected in a sense. If it's a natural kind of thing tried to try to address that because that is a it's an important in a complicated question. I did indeed say that that once we have passed through the most efficient reproductive. The individual is not very important at 10 each year and there are many ways of eliminate eliminating the individual. I've been very much interested in how the finest involutes and width at the end illusion of the whole immunity system and that may be important for nature in the Raw. But of course once we have launched ourselves on Any approach to Medicine we have said we're not going to accept that as a limitation and we are going to try to seek a life that is free of disease and can be completely if possible free of disease that isn't a natural because that's a consequence of the function of the human mind that can look at these issues and can change that that sort of balance but then it has to all of the consequences of this have to be considered. I don't think we need to have cancer and the suffering that cancer and Tails in the demeaning kind of death that often is associated with cancer. I am very proud that in our in our Center we are able to treat effectively Nearly 50% of the patients who come to us with cancer cure their Cancers and I think we can extrapolate that ultimately to 100% And then really get on with the important work of preventing cancer. And I don't think that is going to doesn't have to disturb our ecological relationships with the with nature. If we are very sensitive to what we're doing when we make those advances the word cancer strikes fear into many many many people and I think most people including myself if I were told that I had cancer I would be very very concerned. It sounds to me like you're saying that while there's need to be concerned that it's no longer like being handed a death certificate without the signature. Well, I would say just like you cancer is what I fear the most and when 65% Americans were asked what they fear the most 65% say that they fear cancer the most so you're not at all unusual in this regard, but I'm saying of course is that with respect to cancer? We do have hope and we are getting better and better at treating it. We're not good enough and we're not the least bit satisfied the function of my Institute at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center to say that we're curing 50% too few. We also are very much concerned with the prevention but I am encouraged and I'm optimistic one of the reasons. I'm so optimistic is because I recognize that we are right in the midst of a scientific revolution in medicine. I can have more impact on our lives than the political revolutions the social revolutions even the sexual Revolution. When it was realized at that time. None of the Medical Treatments work that have been to ride by empirical means the bleeding the cup in the plastering. All of that was not effective that set the stage for the beginning of the Scientific Revolution in medicine that started with pastor and that there were some antecedents. Of course there always are and then has developed and has been in its ascendancy for about 30 or 40 years and I have lived in practice during that change in medicine and have seen the Pediatric wards where I work completely changed so that we had many diseases that we couldn't do anything about like the RH disease and we can now prevent like polio those were terrible hole boards of children with rheumatic fever. We don't see those anymore the fruit nephrotic syndrome. You never get them in the University Hospital very rarely because they're taken care of by their own doctors and this whole scene of medicine is changed so dramatically It has been a consequence of a scientific revolution in medicine based on fundamental advances. This is coming and it's extending itself to the cancer field and the field of stroke high blood pressure my goodness. Now, we can control high blood pressure which we couldn't just a few years ago. And it's the same with heart disease are surgical skills are skills in that in molecular and cellular engineering are incredible because we have been developing a scientific approach is that Scientific Revolution plays itself out to all of these things that I'm so enthusiastic about him. But we've got to do is have faith in what we're doing. We've done it in such a marvelous way America has led the world in the Scientific Revolution in medicine. We mustn't lose confidence in that because of criticisms of the The politician that we're not going fast enough heaven knows who I to go very fast while he was fast as we possibly can and we're going very fast. I I used to when I first started working 1942 3 at the University of Minnesota. Discoveries came in frequently now, I feel almost like I'm on the freeway and I see the discoveries in in my field in the a changes that can occur and we've got transplantation of organs. We got bone marrow transplantation is being done here at the University as well as in our institutions with everything I predicted for it is now surpassed. We're going Way Beyond that in the end. It's almost like creating life. Thank you very much for being so nice to be here with you.