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/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.
|
