Iran - is this the beginning of the end, or the end of the beginning

A number of US and UK media outlets have argued the decision to go to war with Iran depended almost entirely on the assumption that a popular uprising by the people could lead to the elimination of the top leadership in Tehran.

From the information available here in the UK it would seem this assessment was provided by Israeli intelligence to Benjamin Netanyahu who then went on to convince President Trump but what was ignored was the fact their analysis was only a possible scenario. 

Based on this assessment the Pentagon were advised by the President to prepare for war and military resources and personnel were told to prepare for a brief military entanglement lasting only a few days rather than the prolonged campaign it has become and with the Strait of Hormuz being closed leading to a dramatic increase in oil prices. At the time of writing,  I am led to believe the price for ordinary petrol (gas) in the US is about $4,10 (£3.10) a gallon while in the UK it is $9.35 (£7,05) and diesel being significantly more.

The core demise of this approach was that Israel assumed the Iranian people, eager to be free of the Ayatollahs and  hopeful of then being able to enjoy Iran's riches would grab the chance presented by the assassination of Khamenei and the IRGC leadership.

It was a reasonable assumption based on earlier mass demonstrations on the streets of Tehran, but what it ignored, or chose to dismiss was the large-scale crackdowns that followed and left thousands of protesters dead,  The hope from Israel and the US was that Iranians would continue taking  to the streets with greater confidence against the IRGC but instead they sheltered from dozens of devastating attacks on their cities..

The assumption made by US/ Israeli strategists was that, much as had happened in Syria under Assad, Hussein in Iraq, and Gaddafi in Libya, the remaining regime, facing a vacuum in decision-making, would have no option but to flee.

Critics in NATO of the US/ Israeli approach are now arguing that while the majority of Iranians disagree with the regime on many issues, overall they do not object to a centralised and strict domestic form of governance, but fear a national leaderless fragmentation of their country. 

External to Iran, many exiles have been drawn to the Shah of Iran/ Persia, Reza Pahlavi as a replacement leader but those within Iran see his family politically damaged because of his father's oppressive regime. What is more, is that without Pahlavi as a figurehead there is no alternative figure to take over the 'political revolution' necessary to eradicate the Ayatollah leadership.

The people largely support Iran’s regional policies, which provide it with influence, strengthen its international position, and enhance its negotiating leverage on nuclear, energy, and military matters. 

Before declaring war, US and Israeli strategists assumed Kurds, Arabs, Baloch, Azeris, and Turkmen would view the regime’s weakness as a chance to replace it with a more liberal and open system that would allow them to secure rights through a new social contract and constitutional framework where they might gain equal participation in power and wealth.

However, the key failure in the US-Israeli plan was their determination to ignore historical evidence and, in particular how, in general, minority groups in revolutions seldom try to overthrow ruling systems (admittedly there are tribal examples throughout Africa but, in broad terms most of these have produced short-term regimes that have themselves been overthrown). As a broad rule of thumb, minority ethnic groups tend to view revolutions as the concern of the majority, so avoid  sacrificing their own members.

Of course, if the US/ Israeli coalition entered this war fully cognisant of all these issues mentioned above then there can only be one conclusion and deeply concerning issue - and that is that both the US and Israel started this war with only one goal in mind - and that is the entire dismantling of the Iranian state. This would in many ways seem the most logical option and is consistent with the “Periphery Doctrine”, developed by David Ben-Gurion and advocates as its core principle is the dividing of states and creating chaotic entities. Indeed it could be argued that, in some respects it would be the safest option for Israel as a divided and broken Iran would cease to be a future threat to the country and, from the US perspective a disjointed Iran would cease to be any kind of threat to the Strait of Hormuz and give the US greater control of world oil supply

Political comment

It is not inconceivable that in the coming days Iran may agree to peace terms, though initial signs are less than promising and the Iranian leadership are fixed on a route that demands they find some way to save face - an approach both Trump and Netanyahu appear unlikely to accept. Already much of the Iranian infrastructure is in tatters and, if Trump is to be believed, could take anything up to 20 years to restore.

On the political front the new Ayatollah, if he is alive, and the IRGC still have a stranglehold on power and there are no signs of them being willing to disappear into the wilderness. Military strategists have long argued the only way to force the Ayatollah out would be to put ground troops into Iran. If this were to happen, the US and Israel would need to engage enough troops to face an Iranian army of over 300,000 troops. This, in itself need not be a problem as the US has done it before (during the Vietnam war the US sent over up to 550, 000 troops though it required conscription. Current signs are  Americans have no taste for a ground war that could lead to thousands of casualties and deaths. It is unlikely Trump to authorise such action especially with the mid-terms approaching

The alternative is for Trump is to do as he has long threatened and 'decimate' the civilian infrastructure. He has already said ".... the entire country can be taken out in one night - and that night might be tomorrow night."

Such an action would leave Iran devastated but it would, at a stroke achieve a key war aim - the dismantling of Iran. The country would be in absolute ruins with millions homeless, many sick and injured  and financially in ruins. But it would leave America in a supreme position of having virtually total control of the Strait of Hormuz and significant control of oil supply from the Middle East.

President Trump is not a stupid man, he knows how to wheel and deal - and the question has to be asked - was this really what it was all about?

The next couple of days could change the shape of the war entirely

Wake up and smell the coffee - antisemitism is on the rise and our politicians are doing nothing

Since October 7th the world has seen a huge surge in antisemitism reminiscent  of Germany during the early stage of the Nazi regime. In response a number of political leaders across Europe and the United States have called for action to protect Jewish communities from race hate. However despite these efforts, where they exist, the statistics show that far from being a decline, there remains a significant problem.

Today's blog will explore some of these efforts and will argue the majority are fundamentally tokenistic and do little to reduce race crime.

There is nothing new about Situational Crime Prevention. It was originated by Ronald V. Clarke in the 1970s and became a broad policy approach led by the British Home Office Research Unit and exported in various forms abroad. The approach is underpinned by a core belief that offenders, particularly perpetrators of antisemitic crime act rationally, weighing risks (getting caught) against the satisfaction of upsetting or harming the victim.

                                               Ronald V. Clarke

With this theoretical underpinning of crime prevention against Jews as a base, let us dissect the actions taken by several countries and analyse its effectiveness, starting with the US and the efforts of President Trump 

United States

In the United States, President Donald Trump has enacted the following:

• Executive Order 14188 (2025): Shortly after his 2025 inauguration, President Trump issued a new executive order, “Additional Measures to Combat Antisemitism,” which vowed to vigorously use legal tools to prosecute and remove perpetrators of antisemitic harassment and violence.
• Federal Funding Pressure: The administration has indicated a willingness to withhold federal funds from universities, such as targetting funding for institutions like Columbia University over the way they handled campus protests.
• Targeting Campus Antisemitism: The administration launched investigations and lawsuits against institutions like Harvard, accusing them of allowing anti-Israel protesters to operate "with impunity" after the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas.
• Use of IHRA Definition: The Department of Education under Trump has applied the IHRA definition of antisemitism to include anti-Zionism and certain criticisms of Israel as actionable discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
• Immigration and Visa Controls: Executive actions in 2025 directed federal agencies to review foreign student visas, allowing for the potential deportation of students who "advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats," which the administration tied to campus antisemitism.

In essence these look like promising moves, albeit a little overstating the significance of campus antisemitism rather than looking at Jew-hate in the wider community. However this may be being unfair because it is action. So how have these approaches panned out in practice?

Well, in fairness, it is early days, but initial indicators from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) are not good. According to their research, antisemitic incidents in the US. reached record highs in 2024 and have continue to surge throughout the whole of 2025, driven by post-October 7, tensions. According to ADL data, 2024 saw 9,354 recorded incidents, with 2025 data showing a rising, more brazen trend, particularly in high-density areas, with a 21% rise in physical assaults reported.

Furthermore, by the end of 2025 over 30% of American Jews reported feeling unsafe in professional or social settings and 18% experienced direct physical or verbal threats. Meanwhile, on social media platforms 73% of American Jews experienced antisemitism online during 2025, specifically on platforms like Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok.

The evidence also shows little significant change in the number of hate crimes prosecuted and/ or convictions resulting in over 90% of American Jews feeling unsafe. Consequently and based on data available, early indications are that the Trump initiative isn't working or, if it is the change required to make America safe for Jews is happening too slowly.

United Kingdom

But before we start pillorying Trump for doing too little it would be worth comparing US efforts to address endemic antisemitism compared to other nations. Let us take the UK as an initial example. The UK has a long history of Jew hatred that goes back to Hugh of Lincoln in 1200 and the resulting Jewish expulsion in 1290. They did not return until  l 1656 during the Interregnum under Oliver Cromwell. Since then Jews were largely able to go about their daily business in peace, though antisemitic attacks continued.

It was only really after October 7th that attacks became more prevalent, though signs of antisemitic behaviour became more prevalent among the hard  Left when Corbyn became leader of Labour and the EHRC ruling against the party in 2020.

More recently, the Community Security Trust  "Antisemitic Incidents Report 2025", , showed 3,700 instances of anti-Jewish hate across the UK in 2025, the second highest annual total ever, and a 4% rise from the 3,556 antisemitic incidents in 2024, and second only to the 4,298 antisemitic incidents logged in 2023. CST recorded 1,662 antisemitic incidents in 2022, and 2,261 in 2021.

Broadly speaking UK government action against antisemitism appears to lie primarily with providing financial support to the Community Security Trust who have been allocated £28 million in 2025/26 through the Jewish Community Protective Security Grant. This includes additional emergency funding of £10 million. In addition, the government have prioritised interventions in the following areas: 

1. Security: Providing better support to ensure the safety and security of Jewish communities. 
2. Education: Tackling antisemitism in schools, colleges, and universities and ensuring that we raise children and young people who embrace people from all backgrounds and faiths.
3. Institutional Action: Tackling antisemitism in key institutions, particularly the NHS, and the culture, sport, and voluntary sectors.

In short, most would agree the UK government have done next to nothing to eradicate antisemitism but Starmer continues to spout meaningless soundbites to appease the Jewish community. Take for example his recent meetings with Birmingham university students who itemised some of the problems associated with being a student on campus. He listened but offered no suggestions as to how a Labour government might help bring change.

France

Meanwhile, in France, Antisemitism has surged dramatically since October 2023, following the Hamas-Israel conflict, with reported incidents increasing by nearly 400% in 2023 to 1,676, compared to 436 in 2022. This includes a spike in physical assaults, school incidents, and acts of vandalism. The sharp rise continues a trend, with 2024 maintaining similarly high levels of anti-Jewish acts.

In response, the government elevated the domestic security alert to the highest possible level (Vigipirate), increasing security around Jewish schools and places of worship. 

President Emmanuel Macron vowed that perpetrators would be punished, prompting a strong crackdown on vandalism and violent attacks. In 2024, the government recorded 9,400 racist crimes and incidents, with the interior ministry emphasizing "total commitment" to tracking down attackers of Jewish individuals and properties.

Noticeably in the immediate period after October 7th over 1,000 antisemitic crimes were recorded but within that same period (post-October 7, 2023), 486 (less than half) were arrested for antisemitic offences in France.

Sadly, most of Europe reveals the same picture with Germany in particular showing a disturbing number of antisemitic crime and a poor conviction rate.

Political comment

The data clearly demonstrates that throughout much of the 'free world' not enough is being done to reduce or even eliminate antisemitism and without a clear strategy to deal with the problem it will continue to grow and prosper - our children will be frightened in their schools, our teenager boys will fear muggings, or girls will be unsafe on our streets, as will our elderly. Going to synagogue will no longer a joy but will become a weekly and dangerous period in our lives.

We cannot allow this to continue.

- and there is an alternative way. All it needs is for government to be willing to invest in our Jewish communities.

In particular:

Legislation - enact a law where antisemitism is viewed as a hate crime and, if convicted in a court of law a perpretrator would receive a custodial sentence of no less than 12-months for a non-violent crime and no less than 5 years for a violent one. Children under 16 would receive a detention and training order of no less than 12 months, or juvenile detention centre in the US,

• A visible and active police presence in local Jewish communities. Demonstatrors attempting to enter Jewish communities or near synagogues will be subject Dispersion orders or Anti-|Social behaviour orders. Police currently have this authority already but must use them far more to protect local residents.
• Holocaust education to become a core part of the curriculum for all schhol children over 13 years of age.
• The USSA, local college student unions, or NUS should be denied authority to require student unions from preventing college/ university Jewish societies from discussing Zionism or Israeli issues. Any attempt to do would be deemed a denial of free speech.
• Any Imam or Muslim from a foreign country who calls for Jihad or globalising the intifada will be subject to immediate repatriation. If the perpetrator is a UK or US national they will face terrorism charges for inciting violence.
• Legislation should be prepared to stipulate Anti-Zionism is racism and that expression of such by a public servant is subject to disciplinary charges,

Now I would be the first to agree there are significant issues with many of these points, but they offer an initial discussion base that could ultimately lead to feeling safer and a substantial decline in race crime

Whatever we do, one thing is transparent - we must do more!

Remembering Sarah

Today (5th April) will mark  nine years since Sarah Halimi,  a 65 year old retired doctor and a French Jew was beaten and murdered then thrown off her balcony simply because she was Jewish.

Sarah was brutally murdered by her neighbor Kobili Traoré. Traore broke into her Paris apartment, stabbed her to death for approximately 50 minutes, and then threw her body from a third-story window.

Traoré, 27, while torturing Halimi was heard calling her a “dirty Jew”, reciting verses from the Quran, and shouting Alahu Akbar. After the murder, he shouted, “I have killed the sheitan,” meaning the devil or demonic spirit in Arabic. Local police were downstairs waiting for backup while the torture was taking place.

In an unfathomable decision in mid-April, France’s highest judicial body, the Court of Cassation, ruled that Traoré will not face trial due to his consumption of marijuana the night of the murder. The courts cited an article of the French criminal code which states that a person is not liable for a crime if they suffered from a psychological or neurological disorder that impaired their actions at the time it was committed. In a 2017 case, a person also under the influence was sentenced to prison for throwing their dog out a window.

Sarah should have received justice. Her killer should have faced the full weight of the law but this didn't happen

We will never forget.

Farage and Robinson - Are they really friends of Israel

Amongst my readership there are some who have identified themselves as being overtly Islamophobic. Amongst these people are some who support  the thoughts and actions of the likes of "Tommy Robinson", Nigel Farage as well as  significant elements within the Reform Party and view them as heroes and true supporters of both Jews and the State of Israel.

But is this true? Are these people friends of the Jewish community or are they riding on our backs as a tool to attack the Muslim community?

Today's blog will try to tackle some of these issues.

First, let's look in depth at some of the personalities involved, because it is quite clear that, for the most part they are all highly charismatic personalities, well experienced in using the media for their own political ends. Of course, it could be argued in this respect they are little different from any other politician, but it is how they use their skills and whether it creates a threat to the Jewish community.

So, let us analyse the history and ideology of the personalities.

1. Tommy Robinson (real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon)

Robinson first came to attention when he helped found the English Defence League (EDL) in June 2009. The EDL was set up originally as an amalgamation of football hooligan groups opposed to the presence of a small Salafi group called Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamah based in Luton, UK.As EDL beme more popular among the broad far right it expanded its remit to become a broadly ant-Muslim organisation, eventually with between 25,000 - 30,000 members and headed by Robinson. 

By the time he took the leadership of EDL, he was already an experienced political activist, having been a member of the UK British National Party (an organisation with significant Nazi roots and historical connections with infamous Nazis, including John Tyndall and Colin Jordan. The political scientist Chris Allen noted that the EDL shared much of the BNP's ideology, but that its "strategies and actions" were very different.

Robinson admits to his membership of the BNP, though has argued that he left in 2005 after a year because 'it was not for him'. However, his links to the far right did not end there - in 2012 he became vice chair of the British Freedom Party in 2012, headed by Paul Weston, a known antisemite and later, in 2019 Robinson became an active supporter of UKIP under the leadership of  Gerald Batten (a questionable character with considerable evidence of his antisemitic leanings).

                                                  Paul Weston

About the same time, he had a further fling with the far right by joining Patriotic Alternative led by Mark Collett, a known antisemite among the far-right community. PA itself is a political group known for its strong antisemitic leanings and clear links to the proscribed neo-Nazi terror group,, National Action.

Realising the risks of being associated with such an outfit, he quickly left and had a short fling with "For Britain", another short-lived far-right party headed by Anne-Marie Waters (an ex-Labour Party member turned neo-fascist) with links to a number of well known European antisemitic groups and individuals.

                               Anne Marie Waters

Robinson then calmed down for a while, only to reappear on a platform with Hitler look-alike, Alex Yerbury (yes, the one whose then girlfriend was a contestant in the far-right beauty pageant "Miss Auschwitz") of the National Support Detachment.

                                               Alex Yerbury

One of the greatest sources of confusion surrounding Robinson’s project is his claim to oppose antisemitism and his supposed support for Israel. For more than twenty years, Robinson has presented himself as a defender of Jews against Islam, invoking Israel's right to defend itself against jihadist opposition and framing his own street politics as part of that struggle.

Robinson’s alignment with Israel and Zionism can be best understood as a strategic adaptation to the historical defeats of British fascism. The 'new' approach responds to the question of how do you mobilise an authoritarian political campaign where openly Nazi symbolism and thought, including promoting antisemitic conspiracies  are heavily contested. In short, he has denied his inner antisemitic convictions by obscuring it under a shroud of supposed "Zionism" that is, in itself fundamentally baseless and only used  as an agent to attack Muslims.

If you think this is too harsh, remember this is a nan who remains an undischarged bankrupt, but according to Hope not Hate through lies and subterfuge today has access to over £3 million worth of funds.

2. Nigel Farage

                                                      Nigel Farage

While it would be wrong to accuse Nigel Farage of having links to the far right, he is no stranger to suggestions of him expressing antisemitic comments. For example:

Antisemitic Abuse: Multiple contemporaries have alleged Farage used antisemitic slurs, sang Nazi-themed songs, and made hateful comments, including stating "Hitler was right" and "Hitler should have gassed you all" to Jewish students.

Witness Accounts: Over 30 former classmates and teachers have come forward with accounts of racist or antisemitic behaviour by Farage, including accusations he led a group that harassed Jewish students.

Social Media: In a tweeted video message, Farage said the UK faced “cultural Marxism”, a term originating in a conspiracy theory based on a supposed plot against national governments, which is closely linked to the far right and antisemitism.

Mainstream media:  In a recent opinion piece for the Newsweek website, Farage talked about “unelected globalists shaping the public’s lives based on secret recommendations from the big banks”. Goldman Sachs was the only bank he mentioned by name, echoing another common theme from far-right antisemitism

Add to this his writing in a separate Newsweek column, Farage said Black Lives Matter was made up of radical socialists trying to destroy nationalism, “oftentimes funded by globalists”, another term linked to such ideas.

In response, the Community Security Trust, a charity that works for the safety of Jewish people in the UK, said in a statement: “This is not the first time that Nigel Farage has used language that evokes antisemitic conspiracy codewords ...". 

Andrew Percy the Conservative MP argued: “These conspiracy theories have real world and dangerous consequences and are without question antisemitic,” he said. “So now he is being put on notice. Farage needs to cut it out before he causes further harm by providing further fuel to racist antisemitic tropes and conspiracy theories.”

Other commentators include Catherine McKinnell the Labour MP who stated: “Talk of shadow cabals, Soros conspiracies and other nonsense has repeatedly been proven to find its roots in anti-Jewish racism. His choice of language, which echoes some of that circulating amongst the far-right online, is worrying and getting worse.”.

So when Farage says he supports the right of Israel to exist I am inclined to ask why. Is it because of a genuine belief that Israel has a right to exist and is the ancestral home of the Jewish people, or is it because he wants a United Kingdom that is both Judenrein and Judenfrei.

3. Elements of the Reform Party

Despite recently establishing the Jewish Reform Group there is substantial evidence of deep-rooted antisemitism within the party. More importantly there appears to be little heart amongst the political elite to tackle the issue and indeed, it is not beyond fantasy that some may endorse it.

• A Reform activist who had been campaigning ahead of the Gorton and Denton by-election was suspended over racist and antisemitic comments he made on social media.
• Another Reform candidate, Tony Mack, a psychotherapist and former black cab driver whose campaign literature promised to fix “woke ideology” and “discrimination against the people of Britain"  shared images of a well-known mural featuring antisemitic tropes. The mural depicts hook-nosed financiers counting money and playing a Monopoly-style board game on the backs of naked figures. The images of the mural shared by Mack was captioned: “If the people stand, the game is over.” When Mack posted the image on Twitter, he added the words: “Get up, stand up.” He also shared the image on Tiktok, writing that Reform was the only way to save Britain from the “globalist agenda”, 
• Or take Gary Farmer, chair of Brighton and Hove Reform Party who posted depictions of the Jewish Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Ed Miliband as a vampire (the version of Ed Miliband as Nosferatu was quickly deleted after posting 
• What about two parliamentary candidates who previously shared on social media material defending Adolf Hitler, denying the Holocaust, promoting conspiracy theories about the Rothschild family and Jewish financier George Soros, denial of antisemitism, and comparisons of the state of Israel with Nazi Germany.
• Or the Tameside Campaign manager include one in which he stated he "would never touch a Jewish woman", and another that appeared to downplay the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust. The latter was in response to a post by former UFC fighter Jake Shields, which claimed that the Holocaust’s death toll is "made up".

I could easily cite many more, but I will stop now for the sake of some kind of brevity.

Political comment

While I am no supporter of Nigel Farage, I think there are some problems accusing him of being an antisemite. In part this is because some of his actions go back to his school days. Now, if we are to accuse Mr Farage of wrongdoing because he sang old Nazi songs then, by that standard, we would also have to accuse Prince Harry, the Duke of Suffolk because he wore a Nazi uniform to a friend's fancy dress party back in 2005. Was the incident antisemitic? Or was it simply a tasteless and grossly inappropriate act by an immature 20 year old student? However, Farage's youthful outbursts must be contextualised alongside some of his later comments and writings. Taken as a whole it does lead to grave questions that need to be answered and, to date these have not been. With this in mind I feel the Jewish community needs to be extremely cautious before taking him under their wing.

Similarly with the Reform Party. While I acknowledge there are many genuine people in the party who support the Jewish community and are fully committed to Israel and its right to exist, I do feel there is extensive evidence to support the belief that antisemitism is endemic within the party and again, while this remains unresolved there is little reason to trust them. Just as Labour, Green and to a lesser extent Conservative parties have an unresolved problem with antisemitism, so too does Reform, perhaps more so.

The case of Tommy Robinson is much clearer. With a 20 year history of association and engagement with the far right across Europe and a blatant disregard for demands from Jewish community groups it is clear Robinson is only out to satisfy his own ends. His Zionism is non-existent and is only used to create further division between Jews and  Muslims. He is very far from a true friend and should be avoided at all costs

Jews are more predisposed to colorectal cancer but there is a shortfall in funding and a lack of desire to change

As someone who two years ago was diagnosed with colorectal cancer and who, by the grace of HaShem and an outstanding consultant and surgeon was cured, I feel an overwhelming moral responsibility to urge people to look out for symptoms of colon/ bowel cancer before it is too late. It is a vile disease and each year we lose far too many good people. Yes the treatment is unpleasant but the alternative is far worse. The reality is those who seek treatment early can recover, even if, like me you delay for a while before going to your doctor. A  diagnosis is not an automatic death sentence.

So, let's look at the facts:

Good news and bad

First, the good news, among Americans under the age of 50, the overall cancer mortality has plummeted by 44% over the last quarter of a century and better diagnostic tools, along with a sharp reduction in smoking, help to explain why deaths from leukaemia as well as lung, breast and brain cancer are falling so dramatically.

Unfortunately, but inevitably there is also bad news - cancer mortality rates in the UK for those under 50 show a concerning trend and while overall cancer deaths are falling, incidences in under-50s have risen by 24% since 1995. Approximately 6,000 younger adults die from cancer annually in the UK, with early-onset bowel cancer mortality projected to rise significantly. In addition, colorectal cancer has risen 1.1% annually since 2005  advancing it from the fifth most common cause of cancer death in the early 1990s to second place today, 

Of even more concern is the fact the data shows how Jews, in particular should be especially alarmed as the research has shown how people of Ashkenazi, or Eastern European Jewish descent are likely to be two or three times more likely to develop colorectal cancer than nearly any other ethnic grouping.

According to the Norton and Elaine Sarnoff Center for Jewish Genetics, "Individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry have among the highest rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) of any ethnic group. In the general population, the lifetime risk of CRC is about five percent. In the Ashkenazi Jewish populations, this risk is two to three times greater than the general population.

About 10 percent of colorectal cancer is hereditary and within these two known cancer syndromes account for a significant proportion of hereditary colorectal cancer. However, having a cancer gene mutation does not mean a person will definitely have cancer, but it does increase their cancer risk. 

                   Alan Herman , National Executive Director of ICRF and a cancer survivor

According to  Alan Herman, the executive director of ICRF, which is the largest non-governmental funding resource for cancer research in Israel. “Colorectal cancer is rising at an alarming rate among young adults, challenging long-held assumptions about who is at risk ... These realities make research more urgent than ever.  By funding Israel’s most promising cancer scientists, the ICRF is driving discoveries that could lead to earlier detection, better treatments and ultimately save lives.”

Indeed, Israel has been very much at the heart of research into colorectal cancer. For example, Irit Ben-Aharon, is a medical oncologist specialising in gastrointestinal cancers and is Director of the Fishman Oncology Centre at Haifa’s Rambam Health Care Campus and also heads the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer task force for young-onset gastrointestinal cancer.

“There’s been an increase in the past three decades of early-onset colorectal cancer, and we don’t really know the reason,” she said. “Only 15% to 20% of these cases are hereditary; the rest came out of the blue.”

There has long been a belief that eating red meat and, in particular highly processed meats such as hot dogs and sausages is a major risk factor in early-onset colorectal cancer. However, Ben-Aharon remains unconvinced. "I don’t think it’s diet only — it’s multi-factorial,” she argues. “When you look at the data, if it would have been only diet, you’d not see the incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer rising all over the world. Diets are different in the U.S., Japan and Scandinavia, yet you see this increasing trend everywhere, and we probably would have seen a much higher incidence, as many people eat ultra-processed food and don’t develop colorectal cancer.”

Of major interest is her belief that bacteria may play a part in causing colorectal cancer., “Some toxins from specific bacteria have been shown to have increased levels in cases of early-onset colorectal cancer, implying these bacteria may induce cancer. Also, there is evidence linking increased risk due to exposure to specific pesticides.”

With regard to prevalence of colorectal cancer amongst Jews she has argued it is more common because Ashkenazi Jews are genetically predisposed to the disease, though not necessarily to the early-onset form of CRC.

“Environmental factors such as diet and other exposures like plastic and pesticides — and the combination with specific predisposition and host features such as microbiome and other pathways — may underlie this trend,” she said.

“Elucidating the interplay between environmental factors and unique features of patients predisposed to developing cancer at an early age would allow us to delineate the high-risk population,” she added. 

Irit Ben-Aharon is a medical oncologist specializing in gastrointestinal cancers. (Courtesy)

Hope for more effective and less toxic treatment

Drug discovery expert Professor Nir London works at Rehovot’s Weizmann Institute of Science as well as being the president of the Israel Chemical Society’s medicinal chemistry section.

                                                              Professor Nir London

“Many cancers are driven by specific mutations, which we call driver mutations. They tend to appear in the same types of cancers,” argues Professor London, “If a particular cell gains this mutation, it has a high propensity to transform into a cancerous cell. Such cancers get addicted to the mutation, so if you inhibit a protein with this mutation, you’ll have a way to mitigate the cancer’s growth. It’s a soft spot.”

“Not all colorectal cancers are the same,” London said. “We are focusing on developing drugs that are specific to a vulnerability found in about 13% of CRC patients. If successful, this could bring hope to hundreds of thousands of patients.”

In other research, Gilad Bachrach, who teaches at Hebrew University-Hadassah’s Institute of Dental Science in Jerusalem has focussed  on oncobacteriology — the study of bacteria as a treatment for cancer.

“Cancer has been treated by surgery and then by chemotherapy, radiotherapy and, most recently, immunotherapy. We believe bacteria therapy can be the next potential option in cancer treatment,” Bachrach said.

“We know bacteria are involved in cancer promotion, as well as anti-cancer activities,” he added. “Now the challenge is to harness bacteria for cancer detection and therapy.”

Ultimately, he said, “surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy are established cancer treatments. My hope is that using bacteria to identify and target cancer will become the next major breakthrough in the field.”

Now, I cannot speak for other people who have experienced treatment for cancer, so here I can only speak for myself. Chemotherapy felt like being hit by a bus and while after only six weeks my cancer was substantially reduced, the treatment process was debilitating and unpleasant with symptoms that, in my case included extreme exhaustion, loss of appetite, inabillity to stand cold weather, nausea and quite severe anaemia. In addition, as a diabetic, glucose levels that had once been previously stable suddenly went out of control resulting in an urgent trip to the A&E department.. 

So any new treatment offering a significant improvement to general wellness can only be of benefit to the patient.

Political constraints

While scientific discoveries like those shown above give us all hope, all is not well in the implementation of cancer healthcare delivery. In the USA, there are clear budget shortfalls, exacerbated by projected reductions in federal funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Cancer Institute (NCI), resulting in delays in colorectal cancer treatment and stalling research,  forcing clinical trial cuts across the USA. These fiscal constraints have resulted in treatment delays of four weeks or more for patients, allowing tumours to spread.

Furthermore, chemotherapy costs in the USA typically range from $1,000 to over $12,000 per month for drugs alone, with total annual treatment often exceeding $100,000. As a result total costs for the patient, including administration and supportive care, can lead (depending on insurance plans) to high out-of-pocket expenses of anything from $5,000 to $10,000+ annually) even with insurance. 

Meanwhile, in the UK, cancer cases are increasing, and cancer care could add £14.4bn to UK health spending annually by 2050, according to the latest OECD modelling. Add to this a lack of trained staff resulting in an NHS unable to deliver timely, high-quality care and diagnostic services. All these issues are further complicated by budgetary constraints that have led to the removal of some drugs from the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF), sparking concerns about access to innovative treatments., 

So while we have outstanding breakthroughs happening across the world and I have only concentrated today on Israeli innovation, we have neither the practical facilities or the budget to implement these developments and until there is a willingness to bring about significant change across health provision internationally people will die unnecessarily.

So, should we be concerned? Well clearly any illness affecting Jews more than the rest of the population and more needs to be done to protect us but I'm not calling for armed rebellion or revolution her. The solution is much simpler and in our own hands.

A commercial FITT test is available to buy through your pharmacy or you csn ask your doctor. They only cost £60 or so, making them.reasonably affordable

 In addition, my US readers have the additional benefit of being urged to have occasional colonoscopies that can detect this form of cancer.

The bottom line is don't sit by and do nothing - the price of peace is eternal vigilance.