OK, there is a lot to read below, but what I want to know is who is willing to give it a go?
I'm currently looking for a physician who will perform this potential cure.
Read the artical and you will get the picture. If this treatment works for cancer, then it could work for many other conditions including RH. A simple injection to one of you most painful joints would be a good test.
Anyhow have a read, and let me know what you think:
reading this essay by an Italian research oncologist.
Is the Cause of Cancer a Common Fungus?
According
to this hypothesis based on years of scientific and clinical research,
the cause of cancer is infection by a common fungus, Candida albicans.
The good news is that it can be treated with a powerful antifungal
agent that can't be patented.
by Dr Tullio Simoncini ©2007
Email: t.simoncini@alice.it
Website: http://www.cancerfungus.com
My
idea is that cancer doesn't depend on mysterious causes (genetic,
immunological or auto-immunological, as the official oncology
proposes), but it results from a simple fungal infection whose
destroying power in the deep tissues is actually underestimated.
The
present work is based on the conviction, supported by many years of
observations, comparisons and experiences, that the necessary and
sufficient cause of the tumour is to be sought in the vast world of the
fungi, the most adaptable, aggressive and evolved micro-organisms known
in nature.
I have tried many times to explain this theory to leading
institutions involved in cancer issues (the Ministry of Health, the
Italian Medical Oncological Association, etc.), elaborating on my
thinking, but I have been brushed aside because of the impossibility of
setting my idea in a conventional context. A different, international
audience represents the possibility of sharing a view about health
which differs from what is widely accepted by today's medical
community, either officially or from the sidelines.
There is an
opposition between the allopathic and the Hippocratic medical ideal.
The position that I promote represents instead a meeting point of these
two conceptions of health, since from the conceptual point of view it
sublimates and adds value to both, while highlighting how they both are
victims of a common conformist language.
The hypothesis of a
fungal aetiology in chronic-degenerative illness, able to connect the
ethical qualities of the individual with the development of specific
pathologies, reconciles the two orientations (allopathic and holistic)
of medicine. The hypothesis is a strong candidate for being that
missing element of psychosomatics that was sought but never found by
one of the fathers of psychosomatics, Viktor von Weiszacker.
In
considering the biological dimensions of the fungi, for instance, it is
possible to compare the different degrees of pathogenicity in relation
to the condition of organs, tissues and cells of a guest organism,
which in turn also and especially depend on the behaviour of the
individual.
Each time the recuperative abilities of a known
psycho-physical structure are exceeded, there is an inevitable
exposure, even considering possible accidental co-founders, to the
aggression--even at the smallest dimensions--of those external agents
that otherwise would be harmless. In the presence of an indubitable
connection between patient morale and disease, it is no longer
legitimate to separate the two domains (allopathic and naturopathic)
which are both indispensable for improving the health of individuals.
Flaws in mainstream theories on cancer causation
When
facing the most pressing contemporary medical problem, cancer, the
first thing to do is to admit that we still do not know its real cause.
However treated in different ways by both official and alternative
medicine, cancer has an aura of mystery that still exists around its
real generative process.
The attempt to overcome the present
impasse must therefore and necessarily go through two separate phases:
a critical one that exposes the present limitations of oncology, and a
constructive one capable of proposing a therapeutic system based on a
new theoretical point of departure. In agreement with the most recent
formulation of scientific philosophy, which suggests a
counter-inductive approach where it is impossible to find a solution
with the conceptual tools that are commonly accepted,1 only one logical
formulation emerges: to refuse the oncological principle which assumes
that cancer is generated by a cellular reproductive anomaly.
However,
if the fundamental hypothesis of cellular reproductive anomaly is
questioned, it becomes clear that all the theories based on this
hypothesis are inevitably flawed.
It follows that both an
auto-immunological process, in which the body's defence mechanisms
against external agents turn their destructive capacity against
internal constituents of the body, and an anomaly of the genetic
structure implicated in the development of auto-destruction are
inevitably disqualified.
Moreover, the common attempt to construct
theories about multiple causes that have an oncogenic effect on
cellular reproduction sometimes seems like a concealing screen, behind
which there is nothing but a wall. These theories propose endless
causes that are more or less associated with each other; and this means
in reality that no valid causes are found. The invocation in turn of
smoking, alcohol, toxic substances, diet, stress, psychological
factors, etc., without a properly defined context, causes confusion and
resignation, and creates even more mystification around a disease which
may turn out to be simpler than it is depicted to be.
As background
information, it is important to review the picture of presumed genetic
influences in the development of cancer processes as they are depicted
by molecular biologists. These are the scientists who perform research
on infinitesimally small cellular mechanisms, but who in real life
never see a patient. All present medical systems are based on this
research, and thus, unfortunately, all therapies currently performed.
The
main hypothesis of a genetic neoplastic causality is essentially
reduced to the fact that the structures and the mechanism in charge of
normal reproductive cellular activity become, for undefined reasons,
capable of an autonomous behaviour that is disjointed from the overall
tissular economy. The genes that normally have a positive role in
cellular reproduction are, then, imprecisely referred to as
"proto-oncogenes"; those that inhibit cellular reproduction are called
"suppressor genes" or "recessive oncogenes". Both endogenous (never
demonstrated) and exogenous cellular factors--that is, those
carcinogenic elements that are usually invoked--are held responsible
for the neoplastic degeneration of the tissues...
From a very
superficial analysis of the presumed oncological picture, however, it
seems to be clear how the assertion of all this unstoppable genetic
hyperactivity can do nothing more that unveil the abysmal stupidity
that is at the basis of this way of conceiving things. All those who
work in the field do nothing but repeat the stale litany of
reproductive cellular anomalies on a genetic basis. It is better to
look for new horizons and conceptual instruments that are capable of
unearthing a real and unique neoplastic aetiology.
Back to taxonomy
In
order to find the possible carcinogenic ens morbi on the horizon of
microbiology, it appears useful to return to the basic taxonomical
concepts of biology where we can see, incidentally, the existence of a
noticeable amount of indecision and indetermination.
Already in
the last century, a German biologist, Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919),
departing from the Linnaeian concept that makes for two great kingdoms
of living things (vegetable and animal), denounced the difficulties of
categorising all those microscopic organisms which, because of their
characteristics and properties, could not be attributed to either the
vegetable or the animal kingdom. For these organisms, he proposed a
third kingdom, Protista (protists).
"This vast and complex world
includes a range of entities beginning with those that have
sub-cellular structure--existing at the limits of life--such as viroids
and viruses, moving through the mycoplasms to, finally, organisms of
greater organisation: bacteria, Actinomycetes, Myxomycetes, fungi,
protozoa and perhaps even some microscopic algae."2
The common
element of these organisms is the feeding system, which, being
implemented (with very few exceptions) by direct absorption of soluble
organic compounds, differentiates them both from animals and
vegetables. Animals also feed as above, but especially by ingesting
solid organic materials that are then transformed through the digestive
process. Vegetables, by utilising mineral compounds and light energy,
are capable of feeding by synthesising the organic substances.
The
contemporary tendency of biologists is once again to pick up, though in
a more sophisticated way, the concept of the third kingdom. One goes
even further, however, arguing that within that kingdom, fungi must be
classified in a distinct category.
O. Verona3 says that if we put
multicellular organisms provided with photosynthetic capabilities
(plants) in the first kingdom and the organisms not provided with
photosynthetic pigmentation (animals) in the second kingdom--and
organisms from both these kingdoms are made of cells provided with a
distinct nucleus (eukaryotes)--and, furthermore, if we put in another
kingdom (protists), those monocellular organisms that have no
chlorophyll and have cells that are without a distinct nucleus
(prokaryotes), the fungi can well have their own kingdom because of the
absence of photosynthetic pigmentation, the ability to be monocellular
and multicellular, and, finally, their possession of a distinct nucleus.
Additionally,
fungi possess a property that is strange when compared to all other
micro-organisms: the ability to have a basic microscopic structure
(hypha) with a simultaneous tendency to grow to remarkable dimensions
(up to several kilograms), keeping unchanged the capacity to adapt and
reproduce at any size.
From this point of view, therefore, fungi
cannot be considered true organisms, but cellular aggregates sui
generis with an organismic behaviour, since each cell maintains its
survival and reproductive potential intact regardless of the structure
in which it exists. It is therefore clear how difficult it is to
identify all the biological processes in such complex living realities.
In fact, even today, there are huge voids and taxonomical
approximations in mycology.
Fungi characteristics
It is
worthwhile to examine more deeply this strange world, with such
peculiar characteristics, and try to highlight those elements that
somehow may be pertinent to the problems of oncology.
1) Fungi are
heterotrophic organisms and therefore need, as far as nitrogen and
carbon are concerned, pre-formed compounds. Of these compounds, simple
carbohydrates, for example monosaccharides (glucose, fructose and
mannose), are among the most utilised sugars. This means that fungi,
during their life cycle, depend on other living beings which must be
exploited in different degrees for their feeding. This occurs both in a
saprophytic way (that is, by feeding on organic waste) and in a
parasitic way (that is, by attacking the tissue of the host directly).
2)
Fungi show a great variety of reproductive manifestations (sexual,
asexual, gemmation; these manifestations can often be observed
simultaneously in the same mycete), combined with a great
morphostructural variety of organs. All of this is directed toward the
end of spore formation, to which the continuity and propagation of the
species is entrusted.
3) In mycology, it is often possible to
observe a particular phenomenon called heterokaryon, characterised by
the coexistence of normal and mutant nuclei in cells that have
undergone a hyphal fusion.
Nowadays, phytopathologists are quite
worried about the creation of individuals that are genetically quite
different even from the parents. This difference has taken place by
means of those reproductive cycles, which are called parasexual. The
indiscriminate use of phytopharmaceuticals has in fact often determined
mutations of the nuclei of many parasitic fungi with the consequent
creation of heterokaryon--and this is sometimes particularly virulent
in its pathogenicity.4
4) In the parasitic dimension, fungi can
develop from the hyphas more or less beak-shaped, specialised
structures that allow the penetration of the host.
5) The production
of spores can be so abundant as to include always, at every cycle,
tens, hundreds and even thousands of millions of elements that can be
dispersed at a remarkable distance from the point of origin5 (a small
movement is sufficient, for example, to implement immediate diffusion).
6) Spores have an immense resistance to external aggression, for
they are capable of staying dormant in adverse conditions for many
years while preserving unaltered their regenerative potentialities.
7)
The development coefficient of the hyphal apexes after the germination
is extremely fast (100 microns per minute under ideal conditions) with
ramification capacity, thus with the appearance of a new apex region
that in some cases is in the neighbourhood of 40-60 seconds.6
8)
The shape of the fungus is never defined, for it is imposed by the
environment in which the fungus develops. It is possible to observe,
for example, the same mycelium in the simple isolated hyphas status in
a liquid environment or in the form of aggregates that are increasingly
solid and compact, up to the formation of pseudoparenchymas and of
filaments and mycelial strings.7
9) By the same token, it is
possible to observe in different fungi the same shape whenever they
must adapt to the same environment (this is called dimorphism). The
partial or total substitution of nourishing substances induces frequent
mutations in fungi, and this is further proof of their high
adaptability to any substrata.
10) When the nutritional conditions
are precarious, many fungi react with hyphal fusion (among nearby
fungi) which allows them to explore the available material more easily,
using more complete physiological processes. This property, which
substitutes co-operation for competition, makes them distinct from any
other micro-organism, and for this reason Buller calls them social
organisms.8
11) When a cell gets old or becomes damaged (e.g., by
a toxic substance or by a pharmaceutical), many fungi whose
intercellular septums are provided with a pore react by implementing a
defence process called protoplasmic flux, through which they transfer
the nucleus and cytoplasm of the damaged cell into a healthy one, thus
conserving unaltered all their biological potential.
12) The
phenomena regulating the development of hyphal ramification are unknown
to date.9 They consist of either a rhythmic development or in the
appearance of sectors which, though they originate from the hyphal
system, are self-regulating,10 that is, independent of the regulating
action and behaviour of the rest of the colony.
13) Fungi are
capable of implementing an infinite number of modifications to their
own metabolism in order to overcome the defence mechanism of the host.
These modifications are implemented through plasmatic and biochemical
actions as well as by a volumetric increase (hypertrophy) and numerical
hyperplasy of the cells that have been attacked.11
14) Fungi are
so aggressive as to attack not only plants, animal tissue, food
supplies and other fungi, but even protozoa, amoebas and nematodes.
Fungi
hunt nematodes, for example, with peculiar hyphal modifications that
constitute real mycelial criss-cross, viscose or ring traps that
immobilise the worms.
In some cases, the aggressive power of the
fungus is so great as to allow it--with only a cellular ring made up of
three unit--to tighten its grip, capture and kill its prey within a
short time, notwithstanding the desperate struggling of the prey.
From
the short notations above, it therefore seems fair to dedicate greater
attention to the world of fungi, especially considering the fact that
biologists and microbiologists constantly highlight large deficiencies
and voids in all their descriptions and interpretations of fungi's
shapes, physiologies and reproductions.
So the fungus, which is the
most powerful and the most organised micro-organism known, seems to be
an extremely logical candidate as a cause of neoplastic proliferation.
Imperfect
fungi (so called because of the lack of knowledge and understanding of
their biological processes) deserve particular attention, since their
essential prerogative sits in their fermentative capacity.
The
greatest disease of mankind may therefore hide within a small cluster
of pathogenic fungi, and may after all be located with just some simple
deductions able to close the circle and provide the solution.
Candida albicans: a necessary and sufficient cause of cancer
Considering
that among the human parasite species the Dermatophytes and
Sporotrichum demonstrate an excessively specific morbidity, and that
experience shows that Actinomycetes, Toluropsis and Histoplasma rarely
enter the context of pathology, the Candida albicans fungus clearly
emerges as the sole candidate for tumour proliferation.
If we stop
for a second and reflect on its characteristics, we can observe many
analogies with neoplastic disease. The most evident are:
1) ubiquitous attachment--no organ or tissue is spared;
2) the constant absence of hyperpyrexia;
3) sporadic and indirect involvement of the differential tissues;
4) invasiveness that is almost exclusively of the focal type;
5) progressive debilitation;
6) refractivity to any type of treatment;
7) proliferation facilitated by multiplicity of indifferent co-founders;
8) Symptomatological basic configuration with structure tending to the chronic.
Therefore,
an exceptionally high and diversified pathogenic potentiality exists in
this mycete of just a few microns in size, which, even though it cannot
be traced with the present experimental instruments, cannot be
neglected from the clinical point of view.
Certainly, its present
nosological classification cannot be satisfactory because, if we do not
keep the possibly endless parasitic configurations in mind, that
classification is too simplistic and constraining.
We therefore have
to hypothesise that Candida, in the moment it is attacked by the
immunological system of the host or by a conventional antimycotic
treatment, does not react in the usual, predicted way but defends
itself by transforming itself into ever-smaller and non-differentiated
elements that maintain their fecundity intact to the point of hiding
their presence both to the host organism and to possible diagnostic
investigations.
Candida's behaviour may be considered to be almost
elastic. When favourable conditions exist, Candida thrives on an
epithelium; as soon as the tissue reaction is engaged, it massively
transforms itself into a form that is less productive but impervious to
attack: the spore. If, then, continuous subepithelial solutions take
place, coupled with a greater areactivity in that very moment, the
spore gets deeper into the lower connective tissue in such an
impervious state that colonisation is irreversible.
In fact, Candida
takes advantage of a structural interchangeability, utilising it
according to the difficulties, e.g., in feeding, to overcome its
biological niche. In this way, Candida is free to expand to maturation
in the soil, air, water, vegetation, etc.--that is, wherever there is
no antibody reaction. In the epithelium, instead, it takes a mixed
form, which is reduced to the sole spore component when it penetrates
the lower epithelial levels, where it tends to expand again in the
presence of conditions of tissular areactivity.
The initial
mandatory step of an in-depth research endeavour would be to understand
if and in which dimensions the spore transcends, what mechanisms it
engages to hide itself or, again, to preserve its parasitic
characteristic, or if it has available a neutral quiescent position
which is difficult or even impossible to detect by the immunological
system.
Unfortunately, today we do not have the appropriate means,
either theoretical or technical, to answer these and similar questions,
so the only valid suggestions can come solely from clinical observation
and experience. While not providing immediate solutions, these sources
can at least stimulate further questions.
Assuming that Candida
albicans is the agent responsible for tumour development, a targeted
therapy would take into account not just its static and macroscopic
manifestations but even the ultramicroscopic ones, especially in their
dynamic valency, that is, the reproductive. It is very probable that
the targets to attack are the fungi's dimensional transition points in
order to perform a decontamination with such a scope as to include the
whole spectrum of the biological expression--parasitic, vegetative,
sporal and even ultradimensional and, to the limit, viral.
If we
stop at the most evident phenomena, we risk administering salves and
unguents forever (in the case of dermatomycosis or in psoriasis), or
clumsily attacking (with surgery, radiotherapy or chemotherapy)
enigmatic tumoural masses with the sole result of facilitating their
propagation, which is already heightened in the mycelial forms.
Why,
one may ask, should we assume a different and heightened activity of
Candida albicans, since it has been abundantly described in its
pathological manifestations? The answer lies in the fact that it has
been studied only in a pathogenic context, that is, only in relation to
the epithelial tissues.
In reality, Candida possesses an
aggressive valency that is diversified in function in the target
tissue. It is just in the connective or in the connective environment,
in fact, and not in the differentiated tissues, that Candida may find
conditions favourable to an unlimited expansion. This emerges if we
stop and reflect for a moment on the main function of connective
tissue, which is to convey and supply nourishing substances to the
cells of the whole organism. This is to be considered as an environment
external to the more differentiated cells such as nervous, muscular,
etc. It is in this context, in fact, that the alimentary competition
takes place.
On the one hand, we have the organism's cellular
elements trying to defeat all forms of invasion; on the other hand, we
have fungal cells trying to absorb ever-growing quantities of
nourishing substances, for they have to obey the species' biological
imperative to form ever larger and diffused masses and colonies.
From
the combination of various factors pertinent to both the host and the
aggressor, it is possible to hypothesise the evolution of a candidosis.
First stage: Integer epitheliums, absence of the debilitating factors. Candida can only exist as a saprophyte.
Second
stage: Non-integer epitheliums (erosions, abrasions, etc.), absence of
stage debilitating factors, unusual transitory conditions (acidosis,
metabolic disorder, and microbial disorder). Candida expands
superficially (classic mycosis, both exogenous and endogenous).
Third
stage: Non-integer epitheliums, presence of debilitating factors
(toxic, stage radiant, traumatic, neuropsychic, etc.). Candida goes
deeper into the subepithelial levels, from which it can be carried to
the whole organism through the blood and lymph (intimate mycosis).12
Stages
one and two are the most studied and understood, while stage three,
though it has been described in its morphological diversity, is reduced
to a silent form of saprophytism. This is not acceptable from a logical
point of view, because no one can demonstrate the harmlessness of the
fungal cells in the deepest parts of the organism.
In fact, the
assumption that Candida can behave in the same saprophytic manner that
is observed on integer epitheliums when it has successfully penetrated
the lower levels is at least risky, because the assumption would have
to be sustained by concepts that are totally aleatory (i.e., dependent
on chance).
In fact, we are asked not only to accept a priori that
the connective environment is (a) not suitable to nourish the Candida,
but also at the same time to accept (b) the omnipotence of the body's
defence system towards an organic structure that is invasive but that
then becomes vulnerable once lodged in the deeper tissues.
As for
point (a), it is difficult to imagine that a micro-organism so able to
adapt itself to any substrata cannot find elements to support itself in
the human organic substance; by the same token, it seems risky to
hypothesise that the human organism's defence system is totally
efficient at every moment of its existence.
As for point (b), the
assumption that there is a tendency to a state of quiescence and
vulnerability in the case of a pathogenic agent such as fungus--the
most invasive and aggressive micro-organism existing in nature--seems
to carry a whiff of the irresponsible.
It is therefore urgent, on
the basis of the abovementioned considerations, to recognise the
hazardous nature of such a pathogenic agent which is capable of easily
taking the most various biological configurations, both biochemical and
structural, regardless of the conditions of the host organism.
The
fungal expansion gradient in fact becomes steeper as the tissue that is
the host of the mycotic invasion becomes less eutrophic and thus less
reactive.
Benign tumours
To that end, it seems useful to
consider briefly the "benign tumour" nosological entity. This is an
issue that always appears in general pathology but is brushed aside
most of the time too easily, and it is overlooked because it usually
doesn't create either problems or worries. It constitutes one of those
underestimated grey areas seldom subjected to rational, fresh
consideration.
If the benign tumour, however, is not considered a
fully fledged tumour, it would be advantageous, for clarity, to
categorise it in an appropriate nosological scheme.
If it is
thought that, instead, it fully belongs to neoplastic pathology, then
it is necessary to consider its non-invasive character and consequently
to consider the reasons for this.
It is in fact evident how in
this second scenario, the thesis based on a presumed predisposition of
the organism to auto-phagocytosis, having to admit an expressive
graduation, would stumble into such additional difficulties such as to
become extremely improbable.
By contrast, in the fungal scenario,
the mystery of why there are benign and malignant tumours is
exhaustively solved, since they can be recognised as having the same
aetiological genesis.
The benignity or malignancy of a cancer in
fact depends on the capability of tissular reaction of a specific organ
expressing itself ultimately in the ability to encyst fungal cells and
to prevent them from developing in ever-larger colonies. This can be
achieved more easily where the ratio between differentiated cells and
connective tissue is in favour of the former.
Situated between the
impervious noble tissues, then, and the defenceless connective tissues,
the differentiated connective structures (the glandular structures in
particular) represent that medium term which is only somewhat
vulnerable to attack because of an ability to offer a certain type of
defence.
And it is in these conditions that benign tumours are
formed; that is, where the glandular connective tissue is successful in
forming hypertrophic and hyperplastic cellular embankments against the
parasites. In the stomach and in the lung, instead, since there are no
specific glandular units, the target organ, provided with a small
defensive capability, is at the mercy of the invader.
Furthermore,
it is worth mentioning how several types of intimate fungal invasion do
not determine the appearance of malignant or benign tumours but a type
of particular benign tumour (specific degenerative alterations), as is
the case with some organs or apparatuses that do not have peculiar
glandular structures but nevertheless are attacked in their connective
tissue, although in a limited way.
In fact, if we consider multiple
sclerosis, SLA, psoriasis, nodular panarthritis, etc., the possible
development of the fungus in a three-dimensional sense is actually
limited by the anatomic configuration of the invaded tissues, so that
only a longitudinal expansion is allowed.
Going back to the
precondition of areactivity that is necessary for neoplastic
development in a specific individual, it is permissible to affirm how
in the human body each external or internal element that determines a
reduction of well-being in an organism, organ or tissue possesses
oncogenic potentiality. This is not so much because of an intrinsic
damaging capability as much as a generic property of favouring the
fungal (that is, tumoural) flourishing.
Then the causal network so
much invoked in contemporary oncology, which involves toxic, genetic,
immunological, psychological, geographical, moral, social and other
factors, finds a correct classification only in a mycotic infectious
perspective where the arithmetical and diachronic summation of harmful
elements works as a co-factor to the external aggression.
Conventional treatments vs antifungal therapy
With
the theoretical basis of the tumour/fungus equivalency demonstrated, it
is clear how this interpretative key offers a long series of questions
concerning contemporary therapies, both oncological (used without
reference indexes) and antimycotic (utilised only at a superficial
level).
Which path is best to walk today, then, when faced with a
cancer patient, since the conventional oncological treatment, not being
aetiological, can only occasionally have positive effects and most of
the time produces damage?
In the fungal perspective, in fact, the
effectiveness of surgery is noticeably reduced because of the extreme
diffusibility and invasiveness characteristic of a mycelial
conglomerate. Surgery to solve the problem is therefore tied to the
case; that is, to conditions in which one has the luck to be able to
remove the entire colony completely (which is often possible in the
presence of a sufficient encystment, but only where benign tumours are
concerned).
Chemotherapy and radiotherapy produce almost exclusively
negative effects, both for their specific ineffectiveness and for their
high toxicity and harmfulness to the tissues, which in the last
analysis favours mycotic aggressiveness.
By contrast, an antifungal,
antitumour-specific therapy would take into account the importance of
the connective tissue together with the reproductive complexity of
fungi. Only by attacking the fungi across the spectrum of all its
forms, at points where it is most vulnerable from the nutritional point
of view, would it be possible to hope to eradicate them from the human
organism.
The first step to take, therefore, would be to reinforce
the cancer patient with generic reconstituent measures (nutrition,
tonics, regulation of rhythms and vital functions) that are able to
enhance the general defences of the organism.
Concerning the
possibility of having available pharmaceutical cures, which
unfortunately do not exist today, it seems useful, in the attempt to
find an antifungal substance that is quite diffusible and therefore
effective, to consider the extreme sensitivity of Candida towards
sodium bicarbonate (i.e., in the oral candidosis of breastfed babies).
This is consistent with the fact that Candida has an accentuated
ability to reproduce in an acid environment.
Theoretically,
therefore, if treatments could be found that put the fungus in direct
contact with high sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) concentrations, we should
be able to see a regression of the tumoural masses.
And this is what
happens in many types of tumour, such as colon and liver--and
especially stomach and lung, the former susceptible to regression just
because of its "external" anatomic position, and the latter because of
the high diffusibility of sodium bicarbonate in the bronchial system
and for its high responsiveness to general reconstituent measures.
By
applying a similar therapeutic approach, it has been possible in many
patients to achieve complete remission of the symptomatology and
normalisation of the instrumental data.
It is important to
emphasise that these cases are just an example of what could be a new
way of perceiving the complexity of medical problems, especially in
oncology.
[Reports of seven cases of patients, several of whom
have been documented for 10 years following sodium bicarbonate
treatment, are summarised in the complete article at the web page
http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/simoncini-writes.html; Editor]
Critical considerations
It
seems appropriate to analyse, in a critical and self-critical spirit,
what may emerge in neoplastic pathology that is new and concrete. If we
closely observe the proposed therapeutic approach, it is possible to
see that, independently of its real effectiveness, it has value as an
innovative theory. First, it challenges the present methodology and
especially its assumptions. Second, it offers a concrete alternative
proposal to a mountain of conjectures and postures that sound
authoritative but are too generic and therefore ineffective.
The
identification of one tumoural cause, even with all the possible
general provisos, would represent a step forward that is indispensable
for escaping that passivity determined by a lack of results, and which
is responsible for medical behaviours that are based too much on faith
and not enough on real confidence.
Given, therefore, that an
unconventional medical approach can benefit some patients betterÑfrom
any point of viewÑthan the official treatments, and since valuable
results can be demonstrated, this should stimulate us to pursue further
research while avoiding patronising postures that are both limiting and
non-productive.
We can therefore discuss whether or not sodium
bicarbonate is the real reason for the recoveries or if, instead, those
recoveries are due to the interaction of a number of conditions that
have been created, the results of unidentified neuropsychical factors,
or maybe the results of something totally unknown. What is beyond
question, however, is the fact that a certain number of people, by not
following conventional methods, have been able to go back to normality
without suffering and without mutilation.
The message of this
experience is therefore a call to search for those solutions that are
in accord with the simple Hippocratic obligation to man's "well-being";
that is, we must be stimulated to a critical evaluation of our
contemporary oncological therapies which indubitably can guarantee
suffering. When we group together both malignant tumours that are
occasionally or never healed (such as lung and stomach) and tumours
that border with benignity (such as the majority of thyroid and
prostatic tumours, etc.) or put them together with those that have an
autonomous positive outcome notwithstanding chemotherapy (i.e.,
infantile leukaemia)-all of this appears to be devious and misleading,
having only the purpose of forging a consensus that would otherwise be
impossible to obtain with intellectually ethical behaviour.
The fact
that modern medicine not only cannot offer sufficient interpretative
criteria but even uses dangerous methodologies that are also harmful
and meaningless-even if carried out with good faithÑis something which
must push us all to search for humane and logical alternatives. At the
same time, it is necessary to carefully, open-mindedly and logically
consider any theory or point of view that is dared to be advanced in
the battle against that monstrous and inhuman yoke that is the tumour.
To
this end, a note of acknowledgement is to go to all those who are aware
of the harmfulness of conventional therapeutic methods and constantly
try to find alternative solutions. People like Di Bella, Govallo and
others, although guilty of utilising the same inauspicious principles
of official medicine (thus showing an excessively conformist mindset),
are actually using common sense by trying to relieve the suffering of
cancer patients through the use of painless methodologies, and in some
cases are able to achieve remissions, even though they're in the dark
about the real causes of cancer.
In an alternative perspective,
then, it would be necessary to conceive a new approach to
experimentation in the oncological field, setting epidemiological,
aetiological, pathogenic, clinical and therapeutic research in line
with a renewed microbiology and mycology that would probably drive us
to the conclusion already illustrated: that is, the tumour is a
fungusÑCandida albicans.
The possible discovery that not only
tumours but also the majority of chronic degenerative disease could be
reconciled to mycotic causality would represent a qualitative quantum
leap, which, by revolutionising medical thinking, could greatly improve
life expectancy and quality of life. Such reconciliation might include
a wider spectrum of fungal parasites (for example, in diseases of the
connective tissues, multiple sclerosis, psoriasis, some epileptic
forms, diabetes type 2, etc.).
In closing, considering that the
world of fungi-those most complex and aggressive micro-organisms-has
been bypassed and left unobserved for far too long, the hope of this
work is to promote awareness of the hazards of these micro-organisms so
that medical resources can be channelled not up blind alleys but
towards the real enemies of the human organism: external infectious
agents.
Addendum: A Note on Cancer Treatment
The implications from my hypothesis that cancer is a fungus which can be eradicated with sodium bicarbonate are that:
1)
eighty years of genetic study and application has been for nothing,
especially considering that the genetic theory of cancer has never been
demonstrated;
2) the loss of millions, if not billions, of lives with all the suffering has been for nothing;
3) the billions of dollars spent on chemotherapy medicine, radiotherapy, etc. has been for nothing;
4) the recognition and prizes given to eminent researchers and professors has been for nothing;
5) the oncologist could be replaced by the family doctor; and
6)
the pharmaceutical industry will incur tremendous financial losses
(sodium bicarbonate is inexpensive and impossible to patent).
My
methods have cured people for 20 years. Many of my patients recovered
completely from cancer, even in cases where official oncology had given
up.
The best way to try to eliminate a tumour is to bring it into
contact with sodium bicarbonate, as closely as possible, i.e., using
oral administration for the digestive tract, an enema for the rectum,
douching for the vagina and uterus, intravenous injection for the lung
and the brain, and inhalation for the upper airways. Breasts, lymph
nodes and subcutaneous lumps can be treated with local perfusions. The
internal organs can be treated with sodium bicarbonate by locating
suitable catheters in the arteries (of the liver, pancreas, prostate
and limbs) or in the cavities (of the pleura or peritoneum). (Note that
sodium bicarbonate should not be used as a cancer preventive.)
It
is important to treat each type of cancer with the right dosage. For
phleboclysis (drip infusion), 500 cc given in a series of intervals-5%
strength on one day and 8.4% the next-is required, depending on the
patient's weight and condition; the stronger dose may perhaps be needed
in cases of lung and brain cancers according to the tumour type
(primary or metastatic) and size. For external administrations, it is
enough to taste if the solution is salty. Sometimes it is judicious to
combine different administrations.
For each treatment, take into
consideration that tumour colonies regress between the third and fourth
day and collapse between the fourth and fifth, so a six-day
administration is sufficient. A complete, effective cycle is made up of
six treatment days on and six days off, repeated four times. The most
important side effects of this care system are thirst and weakness.
For
skin cancers (melanoma, epithelioma, etc.), a 7% iodine tincture should
be spread on the affected area once a day, 20-30 times consecutively in
one sitting, with the aim of producing a number of layers of crust. If,
after one month of treatment, the first crust is gone and the skin is
not completely healed, then the treatment should be continued in the
same manner until the second crust forms, heals and then comes loose
without any assistance. (The procedure is also applicable for treating
psoriasis.) After this treatment, the cancer will be gone and stay away
forever.
For more information, see "Protocol Treatments with
sodium biocarbonate solutions" at
http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/cancer-therapy-simoncini-protocol.html
and FAQ sections at http://www.curenaturalicancro.com.
Editor's Note:
Due
to space constraints, we are unable to reprint Dr Simoncini's paper in
full. To download the complete paper including case study summaries, go
to the web page http://www.
curenaturalicancro.com/simoncini-writes.html.
Endnotes
1. Feyerabend, P.K., Contro il metodo ("Against Method"), Feltrinelli, Milano, 1994, p. 26
2. Verona, O., Il vasto mondo dei funghi ("The Vast World of Fungi"), Edizioni Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1973, p. 1
3. op. cit., p. 2
4. Rambelli, A., Fondamenti di micologia ("Basics of Mycology"), Edizioni Guida, Napoli, 1972, p. 35
5. op. cit.
6. op. cit., p. 28
7. Verona, op. cit., p. 5
8. Rambelli, A., op. cit., p. 31
9. op. cit., p. 28
10. op. cit., p. 29
11. op. cit., p. 266
12. op. cit., p. 273
About the Author:
Based
in Rome, Italy, Dr Tullio Simoncini is a medical doctor and surgeon
specialising in oncology, diabetology and metabolic disorders. He is
also a Doctor of Philosophy. An humanitarian, he is opposed to any kind
of intellectual conformity, which he sees as often based on
suppositions without foundation or, worse, on lies and falsehoods. Dr
Simoncini regularly attends medical conferences and does interviews to
explain what's wrong with conventional cancer theories and treatments,
to present his fungal theory of cancer and to describe case studies
involving patients healed with sodium bicarbonate, a powerful
antifungal. His book, Cancer is a Fungus: A revolution in the therapy
of tumours (Edizioni Lampis), is available in Italian, Dutch and
English from the website http://www.cancerfungus.com.
For more
information on Dr Simoncini's theory, therapy and case studies, and to
view interviews and testimonials, visit the portal website
http://www.cancerfungus.com.