Humans are Frugivores: We’re Designed To Eat Mostly Fruit

Humans are Frugivores:

We’re Designed To Eat Mostly Fruit

 

by √ø∑Dubs

Humans are designed to eat mostly fruit.  We’re frugivores, just like monkeys and chimps.  We have the same physiology, the same stomach acidity, the same tooth structure, the same sweat glands, etc.   The evidence suggesting humans are primarily fruit eaters is so overwhelming, that it just goes to show how influential our educational indoctrination truly is.

We are the most biologically advanced species on Earth.  Fruit is the most advanced part of a plant.  It has to be, since it’s responsibilities relies solely on the progeny of the plant itself.  Fruit, in its strict botanical sense, is the fleshy and ripened ovary of a plant, enclosing the seeds.

Have you ever meant someone who doesn’t like fruit?  I sure haven’t.  We’re told that it’s high in sugar so we should limit our intake, however fruit doesn’t really contain any sugar, at least not our conception of it.  We’ve mistakenly equated man-made sugar with God-made sugar.  It’s not the same stuff, not even close.  One promotes cancer and death, the other, health and vitality.

We instinctively crave fruit.  Put a strawberry and a cheeseburger in front of a baby and see which she goes for. Fruit is sweet, and it’s sweet for a reason.  It tastes good.  This is a clue for humans, so they know to eat it.  This first clue would be it’s appealing color, which immediately grabs our attention.  The second would be it’s appealing aroma.   All species have instructions in their DNA to tell them what to eat and how to live, and humans are no exception.  Our trichromatic vision seeks out fruit.

Andrew Smith of the University of Stirling in Scotland believes that trichromacy provides an important advantage for fruit eating species. (which includes apes, orangutans, chimps, monkeys, and humans)

Humans have so-called trichromatic, or three-color, vision. So do Old World species such as chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans.  -NatGeo

Fruit isn’t just ‘fruit’.  It is ‘the Fruit’, the fruit of the plant. The fruit contains the seed of the plant, it’s only hope for progeny and survival.  Because of this, the fruit is biologically designed to be the most advanced part of the plant, and extremely appealing to frugivorous onlookers who will hopefully spread its seeds far and wide.  It’s vitally important for fruit to stand out with its vibrant colors and appealing aroma.  It’s begging to be picked off the branch, eaten and reproduced.  It’s a mutually beneficial trade off.  The fruit eaters get to enjoy a mighty tasty snack, and in exchange we assist the plant’s propagation and reproduction. Everybody wins.


Frugivory is thought to have evolved as a mutualism to facilitate seed dispersal in plants. In general, an animal benefits by receiving sustenance from the plant by consuming the fruit. If the animal swallows the seeds of the fruit and later travels to a new area, it assists the propagation of the plant by dispersing the seeds when it defecates.

 –Brittanica.

Fruit is the easiest food to digest, which should right there, tip us off that we are biologically designed to eat it.  Just because we are able to digest other foods, does not make us fit for their consumption.  Omnivores are designed to eat everything.  Humans can eat meat, but they are not designed to, which means they are not true carnivores or omnivores.

Flesh eaters have very short intestines for the rapid expulsion of decomposing flesh. Vegetarians and Fruitarians, including man, have very long intestines, for the slow digestion of fruit and vegetables.

Imagine you’re the only person on Earth, there is no infrastructure, there are no restaurants, only you and the wilderness.  Soon you’ll undoubtably get hungry.  What are you going to eat?  There are animals running around everywhere, so you could kill one and cook it over a fire.  But time is of the essence and you need something to eat now, not later.  Besides, the act of killing an unarmed animal and tearing its flesh apart doesn’t exactly sound too appealing.

Luckily there are other options.  You could eat some broccoli you found, but you’ll notice it doesn’t taste that good unless it’s at least steamed, not to mention the difficulty in digestion.  You could dig up some carrots and eat them, but that too would require effort.  The divine architect didn’t provided us with sufficient digging tools.  We do however have eyes that seek out bright colors, and hands that are perfect for grabbing and peeling freshly ripened fruit right off the vine.

Beyond the biological evidence, consider that while carnivores take pleasure in killing animals and eating their raw flesh, any human who killed an animal with his or her bare hands and dug into the raw corpse would be considered deranged. Carnivorous animals are aroused by the scent of blood and the thrill of the chase. Most humans, on the other hand, are revolted by the sight of raw flesh and cannot tolerate hearing the screams of animals being ripped apart and killed. The bloody reality of eating animals is innately repulsive to us, more proof that we were not designed to eat meat. -peta

Proponents of the theory that humans should be classified as omnivores note that human beings do in fact possess a modified form of canine teeth. However, these so-called canine teeth are much more prominent in animals that traditionally never eat flesh, such as apes, camels, and the male musk deer. It must also be noted that the shape, length and hardness of these so-called canine teeth can hardly be compared to those of true carnivorous animals.  -Vasu Murti

If there are a bunch of fruit trees, one can say that whoever created these fruit trees wanted some apples. In other words, by looking at the order in the world, we can infer purpose and from purpose we begin to get some knowledge of the Creator, the Planner of all this. This is, then, how I look at God. I look at God through the works of God’s hands and from those works imply intentions. From these intentions, I receive an impression of the Almighty.

 -Arno Allan Penzias

We don’t have claws or hoofs like carnivores and herbivores.  We aren’t equipped with sharp teeth and abrasive tongues for ripping apart flesh.  In order for meat to taste good we have to cook it.  What other species on Earth cooks their food?

Herbivores (grazers and browsers – bison, rabbits, horses, sheep, deer, goats, giraffes, etc. ) are equipped to handle an exclusive raw leaf/grass diet. Granivores (primarily birds) thrive mostly on the raw grains of various grasses.

Carnivores (cats, lions, tigers, wolves, etc.) eat raw meat, but even they cannot thrive on an all meat diet.

Insectivores (ant-eaters, amphibians, other insects) thrive on raw insects.

Omnivores (hogs, brown bears, raccoons, etc.) are “everything eaters” who thrive on nearly all raw foods.

Frugivores (humans, apes, gorillas, chimpanzees, monkeys, orangutans etc.) thrive mostly on raw fruits, succulent fruit-like vegetables, roots, shoots, nuts and seeds.


Those foods and influences to which a species is biologically adapted are those deemed “natural” to its disposition as derived by the sum total of their biological heritage from millions of years of evolution. Cumulative adaptations in each species over eons of time determines their natural dietary needs.

 -ioel.ie 

We humans are arboreal (tree dwellers), mostly closely resembling orangutans. Like chimps and monkeys, we are designed to eat mostly fruit.  This isn’t to say we can’t also eat vegetables, nuts and seeds, so long as raw fruit is our main course.

“The alternative to treatment is true naturopathy (detoxification), a little known science of nature that has been used for hundreds of years by hundreds of thousands of people and animals worldwide. It has restored health and vitality to their physical, emotional and mental bodies. Detoxification encompasses the sciences of chemistry, biochemistry, botanical science and physics and has always been at the heart of true healing. For that reason, detoxification should be at the heart of natural medicine today, but has been forgotten in our modern world of treatment.”

~ Robert Morse, ND.

Paleopoo: What We Can Learn from Fossilized Feces

Recent research by anthropologists shows that we had an arboreal past. Our genetic ancestors were once tree dwellers. At that time, our genetic ancestors depended upon products of the tree, and later upon the fruits of stalk and vine for our sustenance. Dr. Alan Walker, an anthropologist of John Hopkins University in Maryland, has done research showing that early humans were once exclusively fruit eaters. By careful examination of fossil teeth and fossilized human remains with electron microscopes and other sophisticated tools, Dr. Walker and his colleagues are absolutely certain that early humans until relatively recently, were total fruitarians. These findings were reported in depth in the May 15, 1979 issue of the New York Times.

Dr Alan Walker and his associates, anthropologists at John Hopkins University, using the most modern electronic microscopic equipment, state: “Preliminary studies of fossil teeth have led to the startling suggestion that our early human ancestors (Australopithecus) were not predominantly meat-eaters or even eaters of seeds, shoots, leaves or grasses, nor were they omnivorous. Instead they appear to have subsisted chiefly on a diet of fruit. Every tooth examined from the hominids of the 12 million year period leading up to Homo Erectus appeared to be that of a fruit-eater.”   – NY Times, May 1979

Science Verifies That Humans’ Ancestors Were Frugivores

Proof That Humans Are Fruit Eaters!

 

In 1971, a short-term study by B. J. Meyer was published in the South African Medical Journal describing how lipid profiles and glucose tolerances improved on a particular fruitarian diet.  In a further trial in the study, body weights of overweight subjects showed a tendency to “level off” at the “‘theoretically ideal’ weight”. 

-wikipedia

I do not intend to enter into any lengthy discussion of comparative anatomy and physiology at this place, but will content myself with saying that every anatomical, physiological and embryo-logical feature of man definitely places him in the class frugivore. The number and structure of his teeth, the length and structure of his digestive tract, the position of his eyes, the character of his nails, the functions of his skin, the character of his saliva, the relative size of his liver, the number and position of the milk glands, the position and structure of the sexual organs, the character of the human placenta and many other factors all bear witness to the fact that man is constitutionally a frugivore.

 -Herbert M. Shelton

Eating foods foreign to our species specific diet are mucus forming and lead to dis-ease.

Arnold Ehret claimed that pus- and mucus-forming foods were the cause of human disease, “schleimlose” (slime-free) foods were the key to human health and “fasting (simply eating less) is Nature’s omnipotent method of cleansing the body from the effects of wrong and too much eating.”The term mucus, a glyco-protein acid, derives from the Greek “myxa”. In 1812, William Cullen referred to mucus as ‘butyraceous matter’ and in 1877, Gustav Schlickeysen referred to a mucus layer beneath the human skin in Obst Und Brod. It was later termed ‘mucin’ by Dr. Teofilo De La Torre in the 1950s,’mucous’ by Morris Krok in the 1960s, ‘impacted fecal matter’ by Norman Walker in the 1970s  ‘mucoid matter’ by Robert Gray in the 1980s,and ‘mucoid plaque’ in the 1990s. In the 2000s, Daniel Reid re-introduced the term ‘mucus’. Gray made a further distinction between healthy and unhealthy mucus, and how certain substances left an internal residue which the body suspended in mucu, in contrast with a fruitarian diet.

Having denounced the nitrogenous-albumin metabolic theory in 1909, Ehret learned of a contemporary, Thomas Powell M.D., in 1912, who concurred with his belief that “grape sugar” (simple sugars in fruits and vegetables) was the optimum fuel source, body building material and agent of vitality, for humans, not protein rich foods  

-wikipedia (Arnold Ehret)

“Disease is an effort of the body to eliminate waste, mucus and toxemias, and this system assists Nature in the most perfect and natural way. Not the disease but the body is to be healed; it must be cleansed, freed from waste and foreign matter, from mucus and toxemias accumulated since childhood. You cannot buy health in a bottle, you cannot heal your body, that is, cleanse your system in a few days, you must make “compensation” for the wrong you have done your body all during your life. My system is not a cure or a remedy, it is a regeneration, a thorough house-cleaning, the acquisition of such clean and perfect health as you never knew before.”  

 -The Mucusless Diet Healing System. by Arnold Ehret

Fruit as the Treatment of  Cancer and Diabetes!

It is “off point” to think that one must “kill” or starve a cancer cell. Yes, sugar feeds all cells even cancer cells this is off point though in that to starve a cancer cell you will affect all your cells. This same philosophy is used in chemotherapy and in the medical community. This is ridiculous in that if you damage or weaken your other cells, they will then become your new A-typical or cancer cells. The point of cancer is your sewer system – the Lymphatic System. It is your “sewer system” which removes and neutralizes cellular wastes (acids) and damaged cells. It’s the “acids” that can kill you. By the way, the pH of chemotherapy is equivalent to battery acid!

Hippocrates Institute, in my opinion, is quite off base and can hurt people who have sugar metabolism problems where fruit would help them tremendously. All of our diabetics get fruit. Diabetes is one of the easiest conditions to cure! To summarize: those who have higher fasting glucose levels are starving their cells for essential carbon, which is vital in keeping a cell healthy and alive. Fruits would be very advisable in these cases, as fruit sugars can be used by cells where pancreatic and adrenal function can block glucose (vegetable sugar) entry. You might initially have some blood glucose “loading” but this will disappear and your cells will be getting energy and therefore, the atrophy will stop.


Remember also that fruits are much more electrical (energetic) to one’s body and are much higher in antioxidants and astringents than vegetables, which makes them ideal in cancer cases where one must understand the lymphatic system.

 -Dr. Robert Morse

A Tragic Myth: The Truth About Sugars

As the engine in your car needs a carbon-based fuel to run, so does your physical body. Of the main constituents, your body needs to function amino acids, fatty acids, and sugars are primary. However, it is sugar mixed with oxygen that your body requires to run the machine. To understand sugars better, simple definitions of sugars are necessary.

• Monosaccharides: A single or simple sugar, e.g., glucose, fructose, or galactos, also known as carbohydrates
• Poly or Disaccharides: Starch or complex sugars consisting of several glucose/fructose bonds depending upon the type of starch or carbohydrate.

Your body uses digestion to separate the simple from the complex. In other words, your body can’t use proteins, it can only use amino acids. So the body must break down a complex amino acid structure (called a protein) into amino acids; fats to fatty acids; and starch or complex sugars to simple sugars. With this factual information, it should start to become evident that sugars are a big factor in health! Your body mixes glucose or fructose with oxygen to achieve cellular energy known as ATP (adenosine triphosphate). Without ATP a cell will weaken and become attacked (mainly by parasites), or bonded with a virus, or antigen.

You must understand your body does not use proteins for energy. It is only the adrenaline or epinephrine in meat that is energetic. This is a problem in that your adrenal glands are supposed to supply your body with adrenaline, when needed, for nerve function.

When you consume complex sugars, as in anything complex, your body now has to deal with the overload of simple sugars and now has to store them as fat, excrete what it can, and use the fungal family to help it rid itself of all the unneeded sugar (since sugars are mostly carbon bonds that are broken down into carbonic acid.) Now we are back to excessive acidosis.

The same is true with proteins and fats. A lot of man’s toxemia comes from excess proteins, fats, and sugars, which are broken down into acids, stored and/or parasitically acted upon. With a stagnant lymphatic system, this creates: systemic acidosis, body odors, culturing of parasites (bacterium, fungi, protozoa’s, etc.) all of which starts the inflammatory (immune) response leading to the atrophy of the body.

Fruit (sugars) and Candida (fungus)

 

It is said, ” Sugars feed Candida. I hope with the above understanding you can see through this myth! If you put out a piece of cheese, a slice of bread, and some grapes or a ripe banana on the counter in your kitchen, which one is going to grow mold (fungus) on it first? It will be a race between the bread and cheese. The fruit will only grow mold as it begins to ferment, since the cheese and bread are already fermented.

Remember: Nature uses the parasitic kingdom to clean and eliminate that which is not needed, damaged, or in someway loses its ability to support life in a healthy way. Fermentation and putrefaction are the processes of decay, or breakdown, which require parasitic action. Healthy cells and lymph do not require parasitic action. Of course this includes the cells in your body. With this understanding, what type of sugar could feed Candida (yeast, fungus, molds, warts, etc.)? That’s right… STARCHES and EXCESS COMPLEX SUGARS!

Sugars (fruit) and Cancer

 

“Sugars feed cancer” is another tremendous myth. To claim sugars feed cancer is to deny what decades of science has proven. To starve the body for a sugar is to starve the cell of its energy. This causes cancer. Starvation, acidosis, and ketosis damage cells. A damaged cell is on its walk down the road to A-typical and becoming a cancer cell. This is also true of proteins and refined fats or too many supplemented fatty acids.

Remember: The body is simplistic. More is not better. Less is often times better e.g., fasting of all types, under-eating, etc. Acids feed cancer as acids create inflammation and the parasite response to the above. As previously stated, glucose and fructose are both simple sugars. To say a fruit feeds cancer is also saying vegetables feed cancer. This is all stupid thinking! Even the American Cancer Society recommends a high fruit and vegetable diet!

There are many properties that make fruit superior to vegetables. Fruits are higher in antioxidants and astringents and will move your lymphatic system far better than vegetables. This is why one sees a lymphatic response when fruit is consumed. That is what you want! Fruits, also being a simple sugar, are superior for diabetics, pancreatitis, hepatitis, and all other gastric and intestinal conditions. Fructose does not require insulin or extensive digestive enzymes. Fruits’ magnetic (electrical) energy is the highest of all foods, making them superior brain and nerve foods. They will bring energy to the body where most other foods take it away. NEVER FEAR THE USE OF FRUITS!

-Dr. Robert Morse 

Special thanks to: Mark James Gordon, Dr. Robert Morse, Arnold’s Way, Brian Rossiter, Kevin Hinton, Cullen Smith, Tony Wright, & Susan Willman.

Web Resources:

Fruitarianism and Vegetarianism (Chapter 17) – The Hygienic System – Herbert M. Shelton 
21 Articles-Early-Human-Diet
Natural Human Diet according to Biological and Evolutionary Evidence
Humans Developed Eating Fruit
Biological Adaptations
Comparative Anatomy of Eating
Fruitarianism in the Bible
High Protein Diets Can Kill You
Sweet Natural Living

Books/PDF’s:

Arnold Ehret – Mucusless Diet Healing System
Arnold Ehret – Rational Fasting
Bragg – The Miracle of Fasting
Easy to be Raw Recipes
The Great Lymphatic System
Raw Secrets
Iridology Simplified – Bernard Jensen
The-Science-and-Fine-Art-of-Fasting-Herbert-M.-Shelton
The Raw Truth Recipes and Resources for the Living Foods Lifestyle
Stanley Burroughs – The Master Cleanser (Detox)
The Cause of Disease by Kenneth S. Jaffrey
Tell Me Simply by Kenneth S. Jaffrey
Nature Cure (self healing.se)
Natural Foods – Kenneth S. Jaffrey
Douglas-Graham-The-80-10-10-Diet
Dr. Robert Morse – The Detox Miracle Sourcebook

Videos:

Deep Detox Using FRUIT
Our unique symbiotic relationship with specialized plant development environments (fruit)
Tony Wright
Detox With Fruit! 
Humans are Frugivores – Youtube Playlist
An Open Debate on Fruit Sugar
The following of the opening chapter from Dr. Robert Morse’s “The Detox Miracle Sourcebook”  (PDF)

 

Final Notes:

Fruit is vital to our existence.  Personally, without fruit, I don’t know what I would do.  Fruit has transformed my life since I began this journey back in 2012.  Since then my diet has been at least 51% fruit.  I’ve eliminated my own health problems with diet alone.  When you know what you are biologically designed to eat, it’s not rocket science.

In all the healing modalities I’ve come across, raw fruit is always the common denominator.  Raw fruit is THE ANSWER to most of your health problems. Please, for the love of God, try eating a primarily fruit diet, and sit back and watch your dreams come to fruition.

From √ø∑Dubs @ http://joedubs.com/humans-are-frugivores-fruit-eaters/#more-3368

For more information about vegetarianism see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/vegetarianism   

- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section

Do you LIKE this uniquely informative site?

Hours of effort by a genuinely incapacitated invalid are required every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate, moderate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest.

Now that most people use ad blockers and view these posts on phones and other mobile devices, sites like this earn an ever shrinking pittance from advertising sponsorship. This site needs your help.

Like what you see? Please give anything you can -  

Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!

(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)

Please click below -

And it costs nothing to share this post on Social Media!

Dare to care and share - YOU are our only advertisement!

For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

And see

 New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel -  https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -  

https://www.youtube.com/user/new1lluminati/videos

New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

and see https://plus.google.com/115562482213600937809/posts

and google.com/+newilluminati-channel

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati

New Illuminati on Google Follow - http://www.google.com/friendconnect/settings/edit?smpl=true&st=e%3DAOG8GaCFDeBRZ1yDY2DjCaq61tFDiwO07s%252Fwv3x8%252B%252FJgZJTLx5igbMomJIu3796Ja6n05WaS8qnJ0DLyeGk1q49tLD8m%252FhV1K%252Bq%252BQIOGOwLeWznnm5IGhzjfWzVnq5I4UJr3fw8yk%252B8W2OqwlCbL7BNsW32uouSc79Br%252BkOZQ1Fpzg6J3KMIZkzmg0%252FcPHsWUPqZv845VKS31S%252FbCm8NpINhlK1kDxUdRmcCkT37dIc4RB6PNurjCcd2%252BVkNBveCm4kAgeb8A3Q5hNj6%252FHplvQxKFI%252BW1TYBJVYqHHTKsnBPGcL6wlZdxTUwtfxWU2ZvANJQ%252F%252FUrolBwP7ovb92SZqSWMFJRnN2rsQ%253D%253D%26c%3Dpeoplesense

New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com

DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –

We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Is the Cause of Cancer a Common Fungus?

Is the Cause of Cancer a Common Fungus?

by Dr Tullio Simoncini (oncologist)

 

 

 

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 (For treatment regimes see end of article).

 

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 destructive 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…

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…

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 "protooncogenes"; 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. Verona ³ 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 origin ⁵ (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 T h e y 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 units — 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 [cancerous growth].

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 [cancers].

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 microorganism 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 autophagocytosis, 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 wellbeing 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  ; NEXUS 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 better — from any point of view — than 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 faith — is 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 fungus — Candida 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 . ¥

By Dr Tullio Simoncini (oncologist) © 2007

Email: t.simoncini@alice.it

Website:

http://www.cancerfungus.com

Nexus 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 .

Edited From – NEXUS New Times Magazine AUGUST–SEPTEMBER 2007

From http://www.nexusmagazine.com

Images - https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjK2VVJNf27GbbGqTrmoWrE0oo99Q8FxJR8LYMJtSWaCDBJitSSKyhCg_SO6HCq1BS_yFqdqIWkXfb-xxJvSqN8Gz7-HY-rfQE1WRcDCGgPMfUCWMYtc3HbmnbNXqfd2_kgmTlTFKhurf3d/s320/CancerFungusCandidaMed.jpg

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5zZOkKc-GgMOwraLYnup1q8Zl8lPsrrimxXZ5OdbawDRfDfgXM8yauxA4WkrBwO-FXRi7ODNSGxP1VwTQoinpkoOSwTAOjWC7GrGJL8Nn40aYqNqWJrbwS1z9rwQgp2b_cJMci0tSj9Fe/s200/CancerCandidaFungalInfectionSml.jpg

http://www.alternative-cancer-care.com/Cancer_Fungus.html

http://www.doctorfungus.org/Thefungi/img/candida.jpg

https://newsline.llnl.gov/articles/2008/may/images/05.16.08/fungus.jpg

 

For further enlightenment enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati:

 http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

or http://newilluminati.blog-city.com  (this one only works with Firefox)

And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com

 New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

 http://newilluminati.blog-city.com (this one only works with Firefox)

 New Illuminati on Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/pages/New-Illuminati/320674219559  

The Prince of Centraxis – http://centraxis.blogspot.com

This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com