This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ostrander, G. K. Articles by Wolfe, M. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ostrander, G. K. Articles by Wolfe, M. J. Related Collections Therapeutics and Targets Therapeutics and Targets: Identification, Validation, and Markers

Shark Cartilage, Cancer and the Growing Threat of Pseudoscience

¹ Department of Biology and Department of Comparative Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland; ² Jake Gittlen Cancer Research Institute, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania; and ³ Registry of Tumors in Lower Animals, Experimental Pathology Laboratories, Inc., Sterling, Virginia

The promotion of crude shark cartilage extracts as a cure for cancer has contributed to at least two significant negative outcomes: a dramatic decline in shark populations and a diversion of patients from effective cancer treatments. An alleged lack of cancer in sharks constitutes a key justification for its use. Herein, both malignant and benign neoplasms of sharks and their relatives are described, including previously unreported cases from the Registry of Tumors in Lower Animals, and two sharks with two cancers each. Additional justifications for using shark cartilage are illogical extensions of the finding of antiangiogenic and anti-invasive substances in cartilage. Scientific evidence to date supports neither the efficacy of crude cartilage extracts nor the ability of effective components to reach and eradicate cancer cells. The fact that people think shark cartilage consumption can cure cancer illustrates the serious potential impacts of pseudoscience. Although components of shark cartilage may work as a cancer retardant, crude extracts are ineffective. Efficiencies of technology (e.g., fish harvesting), the power of mass media to reach the lay public, and the susceptibility of the public to pseudoscience amplifies the negative impacts of shark cartilage use. To facilitate the use of reason as the basis of public and private decision-making, the evidence-based mechanisms of evaluation used daily by the scientific community should be added to the training of media and governmental professionals. Increased use of logical, collaborative discussion will be necessary to ensure a sustainable future for man and the biosphere.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. G. Duda, K. S. Cohen, S. V. Kozin, J. Y. Perentes, D. Fukumura, D. T. Scadden, and R. K. Jain Evidence for incorporation of bone marrow-derived endothelial cells into perfused blood vessels in tumors Blood, April 1, 2006; 107(7): 2774 - 2776. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				From the library Br J Ophthalmol, March 1, 2005; 89(3): 394 - 394. [Full Text] [PDF]