Cancer as a fungus?!?!? Thread

This may seem like bull s*** to many of you, but with as many people dying from cancer, I'm keeping my mind open about it.

Supposedly there is a Italian Doctor, some Dr. Simoncini, who has stated that cancer, rather than a genetic mutation, is actually a fungus called Candida that naturally grows in everyone's body, and is curable. Hard to believe, eh? Well, he says this fungus can be harmful if allowed to grow into a mass, and the bodies natural reaction to this growth is to build a barrier of fast growing cells, which forms the tumor. And as the fungus grows, the cells expand, and the fungus spreads throughout the body. I don't know about you, but it seams plausible.

What is his cure, you might be thinking? Why, it's an anti-fungus, good ole sodium bicarbonate. He supposedly cured one guy of lung cancer, who was previously given six months to live.

That's not the end of it. The body needs a good balanced immune system to have the quick growing cells that block the fungus from spreading. But most peoples immune systems are trashed from all of the processed foods, bad air quality, ect. And guess what they do to cancer patients? Blast them with chemo, which destroys their immune system. And what about the protective fast growing cells?
The kill them with radiation treatment. It makes sense why people who have previously had cancer have it reoccur, because they never killed the fungus...

Anyway, what do you guys think? I would like to believe its true, since it provides an actual cure.

Google Tullio Simoncini for more info.

If cancer were a fungus, a tumour wouldn't consist entirely of the same type of tissue as whatever animal it has grown in. The guy is a quack.

End of thread.

ambershee wrote: The guy is a quack.

End of thread.

Funny how something out of the norm gets immediately shot down...

Here is a summary about his book from his website.

A one off recovery doesn't mean anything. For all we know, there could have been an undiscovered anti cancer drug coming out of the wallpaper in the room, and the bicarb is just a coincidence.

100% with shee on this one. Also, on that website, the first thing I looked for (clinical trials or similar) isn't there(or at least isn't easy to find). If it's genuine, I want to see some field trials conducted by a neutral party. The absence of any such trials is damning.

Our good friend Simoncini appears right in this wonderful list on QuackWatch:
Quackwatch.com

Along with a whole load of other people trying to sell you 'alternative treatments' based on whatever pseduo-science suits them best.

Edit:

Quack "Dr."Tullio Simoncini claims that all cancers are fungal colonies. It might be worth mentioning upfront that his license to practice medicine has been withdrawn, and in 2006 he was convicted by an Italian judge for wrongful death and swindling.

Mymalignantmelanoma.blogspot.com

You've just got to google this guys name to get scores of similar information.

Edited by: ambershee

Who do you think declared him a quack?!? Why money making big Pharma did. They don't want some guy to break their monopoly.

That's why they took his lisence. That's why they tried to pin a death on him, to ruin his reputation.

Edited by: x3nu

...or it could be that he's talking utter bullshit to make money from gullible people. I reckon you're being reeled in hook, line and sinker.

If it were as easy to cure cancer as injecting a tumour with baking soda, I think it would be rather difficult to cover up such a conspiracy on a global level. The guy has no evidence of any kind to back up his wild claims.

We would think so. But we have no idea what our governments are capable of. I think this guy been tagged as a charlatan, a quack, whatever so no one considers his work, which in turn keeps it hushed. There's an article on David Icke's website about Simoncini, goes into more depth about the fungus and baking soda.

Edited by: x3nu

Millions (if not billions) a Year are spent on Cancer Treatment, Research and what-knot.
If the answer was as simple as "baking soda", I think we would have known a long time ago.

And as amberhee has mentioned; there seems to be no real medical data/studies/clinical trials etc.

Edited by: Wagmance

l0rdx3nu wrote: This may seem like bull s*** to many of you, but with as many people dying from cancer, I'm keeping my mind open about it.

Supposedly there is a Italian Doctor, some Dr. Simoncini, who has stated that cancer, rather than a genetic mutation, is actually a fungus called Candida that naturally grows in everyone's body, and is curable. Hard to believe, eh? Well, he says this fungus can be harmful if allowed to grow into a mass, and the bodies natural reaction to this growth is to build a barrier of fast growing cells, which forms the tumor. And as the fungus grows, the cells expand, and the fungus spreads throughout the body. I don't know about you, but it seams plausible.

What is his cure, you might be thinking? Why, it's an anti-fungus, good ole sodium bicarbonate. He supposedly cured one guy of lung cancer, who was previously given six months to live.

That's not the end of it. The body needs a good balanced immune system to have the quick growing cells that block the fungus from spreading. But most peoples immune systems are trashed from all of the processed foods, bad air quality, ect. And guess what they do to cancer patients? Blast them with chemo, which destroys their immune system. And what about the protective fast growing cells?
The kill them with radiation treatment. It makes sense why people who have previously had cancer have it reoccur, because they never killed the fungus...

Anyway, what do you guys think? I would like to believe its true, since it provides an actual cure.

Google Tullio Simoncini for more info.

If its curable, then why are all those dying from cancer not cured?

If its curable, then why are all those dying from cancer not cured?

Well, I can think of two reasons: there's no money in it, and to keep populations down. It makes me sick...

I'm sure people would be willing to spend a lot more money for an honest cure than they would spend to undergo uncertain treatment like chemo. But if you're not actually going to look at medical studies and what cancer really is, I doubt there's anything someone can say to convince you the guy is a nutball/scam artist.

Probably true, Cryrid, but there's one thing I will try:

You are utterly convinced that governments and large corporations will do horrible things for money, but are completely blind to the possibility that Dr. Simoncini might be doing something horrible to earn easy money.

Same motive - so why is one innocent beyond all doubt while the other is guilty by default?

It's because conspiracy theorists like to villanize large organizations rather than specific individuals.

They perceive large organizations as this group of people completely dedicated to shielding the facts from a population and they consider that organization much more powerful (thus more likely to get away with lies) than just one person.

It's well documented that Cancerous tumors can be started by fungal, viral and bacterial infections. Also modeling cancer cell spread on internal fungi migrations would also make sense.... I'm sure someones already tried that though.

Maybe, in some forms, but all? Unlikely... Not that I bothered reading through all the information on his site....

Rafenrazer wrote: It's well documented that Cancerous tumors can be started by fungal, viral and bacterial infections.

The thing is, he is implying the cancerous tumor itself is a fungus.

macacos2 wrote:

Rafenrazer wrote: It's well documented that Cancerous tumors can be started by fungal, viral and bacterial infections.

The thing is, he is implying the cancerous tumor itself is a fungus.

Or is he? What i got out of it was that the fungus essentially fueled the cell growth, the defense against it.

David Ike Article

l0rdx3nu wrote:

macacos2 wrote:

Rafenrazer wrote: It's well documented that Cancerous tumors can be started by fungal, viral and bacterial infections.

The thing is, he is implying the cancerous tumor itself is a fungus.

Or is he? What i got out of it was that the fungus essentially fueled the cell growth, the defense against it.

David Ike Article

David Ike is a moron that believes we're under the control by descendants of lizards from another dimension.

Think about finding better sources.

In other news, the united states caused the tsunami in japan by using a completely logical weapon that creates earthquakes

It's true because I saw it on the internet

(Someone is still gonna try and defend the earthquake machine and this is when I'll close my fist and punch a cat)

Edited by: macacos2

l0rdx3nu wrote:

If its curable, then why are all those dying from cancer not cured?

Well, I can think of two reasons: there's no money in it, and to keep populations down. It makes me sick...

I'm not saying your 100% wrong but i dont like to look at it that way,
A lot of people who have taken up the cause to find ways to stop cancer have done it out of passion, for science or for those they have lost to a horrible terminal illness. If it was a fungus i think they would have known that a long time ago, and since not every scientist could possibly be a part of a massive conspiracy i doubt it wouldn't have been leaked to everyone and now known as common knowledge. No offence but it sounds somewhat like a stupid conspiracy theory when people say its all for money and population control. As Macacous2 said:

macacos2 wrote: In other news, the united states caused the tsunami in japan by using a completely logical weapon that creates earthquakes

It's true because I saw it on the internet

(Someone is still gonna try and defend the earthquake machine and this is when I'll close my fist and punch a cat)

Its the same basic idea, just a conspiracy.

As for the idea of cancer being a fungus, i wouldn't know as i have no science background. However as nice as it would be to cure one of the worlds worst illnesses (to my understanding) with bicarb soda, i highly doubt thats the case.

l0rdx3nu wrote:

If its curable, then why are all those dying from cancer not cured?

Well, I can think of two reasons: there's no money in it, and to keep populations down. It makes me sick...

Damn this capitalistic situation

Med-Student-Modder-Freak here:

Please tell this quack doctor to take a look at tumour tissue under the microscope. The distinct lack of fungus present is a hint.