By David Stephen “neurons and nerves — via a variety of mechanisms that researchers are still teasing apart — seem to regulate almost everything about cancer, from tumor initiation in many cases to tumor growth, tumor invasion and metastasis, probably resistance to therapy, and evolution of the disease.”
“The cancer cells use the nerves as highways to exit a primary tumor site and metastasize. Tumors are more electrically active than normal tissues.” — Making Cancer Nervous by The Transmitter
These are established biological advances. They are the direction from which answers could emerge, if persistent efforts are focused in the area.
So, unleash 100,000 AI agents to mix, sieve, filter and find information on any possible loopholes about neurons with their electrical and chemical signals.
This should include postulates about what is possible or not. Then look for every way to counter those loopholes, including devices, delivery methods, diversion, targets and so forth. The goal is to find path that would be advantageous against cancers.
Aside from what AI agents would do, use established approaches from other therapies to look at how to dispossess tumors of their electrical activities.
There have been reports of idiopathic under-50 surge cancer surge.
There is an urgent need, to apply AI agents at aggressive theoretical investigation of electrical and chemical signals of neurons on how to understand more about their contributions as well as what else maybe possible to do towards management, across cancers and cure before 2030. The ambitious cure-only goal would mean to throw everything at the problem, excavating tens of theoretical hypothesis.
Also, doing this for cancer would indicate immense progress against neurological and psychiatric disorders.
Path
Empirical neuroscience has established that neurons are responsible for regulation of internal senses, just like they are responsible for memory, emotions and feelings.
Regulation of internal senses include activities of the colon, lungs, pancreas, circulation, throat, and so on.
Regulation is postulated as the giving of limits and extents for which functions would work. This means that there is a minimum and there is a maximum, for functions.
So, while organs, tissues are located elsewhere in the body, how much they should work, is given from brain, by neurons — and their electrical and chemical signals.
Empirical neuroscience has also established that neurons are often in clusters in different parts of the brain and those clusters become responsible [mostly] for specific functions.
For example, some of the clusters of neurons in the hypothalamus regulate the pancreas and liver, amongst others.
The brainstem regulates the lungs. Different parts of the brain regulate the colon. Simply, in these places, groups of neurons appear dedicated to specific functions.
This means that if there is some error in the part of the brain having the cluster, the function there could be lost.
But what exactly does it mean that a group of neurons regulate a specific function? One of the ways to answer is to postulate that electrical and chemical signals are responsible for regulation.
This implies that what actually holds the information of how an organ should work are electrical and chemical signals. How so?
It is true that during several functions, genes are expressed, however, neurons that participate in functions [of human life and experiences] have to be active, that is fire or have electrical activity, then also transmit or have chemical activity.
Simply, while neurons can express genes without electrical and chemical signals, for them to actually do functions like memory, feeling, emotion and regulate internal senses they need to use electrical and chemical signals.
Postulate
While it is often said that neurons use electrical and chemical signals for communication, it is postulated here that electrical and chemical signals hold the configurations [or formations] for functions.
This says that whatever a specific memory is — or an emotion, or a feeling or the limit or extent of how an organ should function — is by a specific assembly of electrical and chemical signals.
How? Electrical and chemical signals interact. Their interactions have attributes. It is in their interactions that the configurations of functions are obtained. This means that alone, they may not do much but as soon as they interact, the assembly or formation they have to be to specify a function is accessed.
Now, this can be described as a general way that electrical and chemical signals act to make functions. So, the interactions and then the factors [or attributes] of those interactions that grade them or decide how much they can interact.
Some of the factors or attributes include attention, less than attention, subjectivity and intent. There are others like splits, sequences, thick sets, and so forth.
Attention is obtained by the set with the highest intensity of electrical signals or the set with the most volume of a significant chemical signal [say glutamate] or the most of a collection of chemical signals.
Just one set among all the sets has the most prioritization in a moment. There are often fast and numerous interchanges with others. There are also often sets with nearness to prioritization [or attention], but just one is able to be in attention, at any moment.
This means that while attributes are present across interactions, there are still ways they have interdependence. This says that while some factors may not often be too influential, prioritization [or attention] makes a lot of determination.
Now, because electrical and chemical signals are involved with memory, emotion, feeling and regulation functions, if there is too much maximum somewhere it might affect a minimum elsewhere or the possibility for others to have maximum [or prioritization].
Simply, there are some factors of interactions, where one may affect others, especially attention. Attention [or prioritization] for example, has to be held by most sets, over certain intervals. It could be within 24-hour for some, or below, or a little over.
This implies that all sets for regulations have to get in attention from time to time. This prioritization helps them to stay within what can be called their [functional] elastic limits.
For example, the liver has to work within a certain efficiency rate, when busy or not so busy [so to speak]. It may have [say] a lot of things to do, and need to work at a certain rate, to keep up. So, it needs to get prioritization in those moments.
Also, even when it is not so busy, it needs to get prioritized, to act like it is busy as well, keeping its readiness possible, for when there is a lot of work. If it does not get prioritized enough, when there is no work, it may lose how to do so, when there is work – so to speak.
Now, if other sets are prioritized too much, not allowing the liver set to get prioritized, it may be working under low limits – when it has a lot of stuff to do, or if it does not get enough prioritization, it may not get to try what it means to work at a maximum efficiency rate.
If this happens over a period of time, it may start to affect the liver, in some form and may accumulate. The same with other organs, so to speak.
Simply, all internal organs have sets in the brain that would need to be prioritized from time to time. When this does not happen, due to disruption by other sets getting prioritized more often, it may start to create a low efficiency cycle, which may also not let an anomaly [within] be noticed early, and corrected [within].
Theoretical Oncology
Since nerve cells regulate internal signals as well as tumors. How is it possible to model regulation, especially minimum and maximum? To prospect why cancers take off, and what happens during it as well?
Now, if there are permutations for configurations of electrical and chemical signals in sets, towards cancer related functions, how can they inform how to disrupt the configurations of the bioelectric activity of tumors? Also, how can the regulation of cancers [say maladaptive neuroplasticity] by electrical and chemical signals, in sets, be discontinued or mitigated, towards starving tumors?
When cancers use nerves as highways to metastasize, how can there be anti-metastatic configurations of electrical and chemical signals, in sets, against these [including with signaling molecules or growth signals]?
Also, if GLP-1s seem helpful against cancers, could it be that some of the configurations that may have boosted some cancers, were cut? Could it also be that GLP-1s were also able to spread prioritization to some sets, giving then more time, than they would normally have? These questions can be answered by modeling electrical and chemical signals, thoroughly, to close in against unknowns in oncology.
Modeling electrical and chemical signals in multiple ways, with extensive measures could be useful to understand an angle of the under-50 cancer surge as well as disruption of nerves and neural involvement in cancers.
This can be accelerated fast with preliminary results by January, 2027 with clinical study designs ready as well.
Also, to develop even better ways to use electrodes or neurotechnology against cancer – neural crosstalk.
AI agents can be prompted with scenarios, then given some of the postulates, just to find new attributes that can be weakened when directed against tumors.
This is based on Conceptual Biomarkers and Theoretical Biological Factors for Psychiatric and Intelligence Nosology.
There is a recent [September, 2026] analysis on ESMO, The new frontier of cancer neuroscience, stating that, “Growing evidence that the nervous system can influence tumour behaviour highlights the need to better understand the biological basis and consequences of interactions between cancer cells and the host, both to elucidate mechanisms of disease progression and to identify new therapeutic opportunities (Nature 2023;618:467–479). However, the neuroscience of cancer remains comparatively underexplored today. A key challenge for this emerging field is to identify unifying principles that control tumour–nervous system communication and determine whether these interactions follow a predictable biological logic.”
“Recent studies illustrate the diverse mechanisms through which neural signalling can influence tumour biology. In small cell lung cancer (SCLC), intrinsic electrical activity within the classic neuroendocrine-high subtype of the tumour cells was shown to directly promote tumour progression (Nature 2025;639:765–775). Neuroendocrine cancer cells were metabolically supported by non-neuroendocrine cancer cells, revealing functional cooperation between distinct cancer cell subtypes.”