Cancer is often approached as a localized biological phenomenon, centered on mutations and uncontrolled cellular proliferation. This approach has produced major technical advances in diagnosis and treatment, yet it still does not fully explain why molecular-level deviations—common in living organisms—can culminate in the collapse of an entire living system. This paper proposes a systems-reading framework that interprets cancer as a breakdown of symbiosis at the cellular level, analyzed through three foundational laws: Feedback, Resonance, and Equilibrium. Within this framework, cancer begins when biological feedback loops weaken, reducing the cell’s capacity to recognize deviations and self-correct. Feedback weakening leads to resonance deviation, in which a sub-system establishes its own operating rhythm and reorganizes the microenvironment in pursuit of local advantage. When resonance deviation persists, growth exceeds regulatory thresholds and disrupts the body’s multi-layered equilibrium—transforming growth from an expression of life into a force that exhausts the system. This paper does not seek to replace existing biological descriptions or treatment methods. Instead, it offers a unified conceptual framework to connect disparate phenomena—such as mutation accumulation, tumor microenvironment restructuring, immune evasion, and systemic wasting—within a single living-systems logic. The Symbiotic Framework thereby shifts analytical focus from the “tumor” to “system behavior,” and suggests an orientation in which the ultimate aim of medicine is not only the elimination of abnormal cells, but the restoration of the living system’s self-regulatory capacity.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Văn Dũng Phạm
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Văn Dũng Phạm (Tue,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69843583f1d9ada3c1fb4586 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18475529
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: