Dermatitis Artefacta

Abstract

the oncogenic virus from sick mother to fetus may also occur (Kalter et al. 1975, Lapin et al. 1975). Although multiple factors (Boyd 1970, Ors 1974) may underlie tumour formation, there may be an ever-present agent which is the central or key factor in this process. It seems likely that oncogenic viruses play a central role in tumour formation, a role which thus may be likened to that of bacteria in infections. Irrespective of the validity of mutational theory, genes seem to be the keystones of tumoral process. And whatever the ultimate results of research in tumour causation may reveal with regard to the role of viruses in the process, the possibility of an etiological role for viruses has stimulated much valuable work. It has been observed in viral carcinogenesis that the virus loses its independent existence and becomes invisible as it combines with the genetic material (Boyd 1970). There is indeed a possibility that viruses may be transmitted to the offspring and later generations through heredity by their incorporation into the structure of genes. If this were proven, the concept of disease and the theory of evolution would become inseparably united. Such proof, together with evidence in favour of the hypothesis that mutation and the appearance of a new species are due to a viral infection of the genetic structure in the former species makes the topic of nucleic acids in biological evolution particularly interesting (Ors 1974). A far higher proportion of the total incidence of cancer may be environmentally induced than had earlier been suspected (Haddow 1971). In the light of the evolutionary approach, the concept of environment assumes a more comprehensive and dynamic significance. Furthermore, what is called a 'genetic mechanism' in cancer may be, in certain cases at least, a viral (hence, in the last analysis, an environmental) factor. The concepts of cancer, environment and evolution have thus become united in a satisfyingly coherent way.