CANCER INFO: IS THE CAUSE OF CANCER A COMMON FUNGUS?

Post useful information that you yourself have tried. Treatments that arent part of the Medical Death Cartel Monopoly. Treatment centers that offer real hope.... Healthy Foods, vitamins, minerals... sources for them etc....
pokerkid
Site Admin
Posts: 7781

CANCER INFO: IS THE CAUSE OF CANCER A COMMON FUNGUS?

Post#1 » Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:43 pm

CANCER INFO: IS THE CAUSE OF CANCER A COMMON FUNGUS?
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/fo ... ead=108094
Posted By: RayelansMailbag <Send E-Mail>
Date: Saturday, 18 August 2007, 12:32 p.m.

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.

Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume
14, Number 5 (August - September 2007)

PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia. editor@nexusmagazine.com

Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381

>From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com

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/simon ... ites.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/cance ... tocol.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.

Return to “Healthy Ideas for the Flesh”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest