by Wilfrid Hartnagel
What is cancer? – Cancer is a fungus.
How to kill fungi? – With sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3).
Who made this discovery? – Dr. Tullio Simoncini, a Roman oncologist.
How do you come up with such an idea, prove it, develop the applicationand go on to successfully treat cancer patients? – Let us hear the story fromthe horse’s mouth:
Cancer and fungus – a path of personal research
by Dr. Tullio Simoncini
One of the questions that I am asked most frequently when the issue of this new anti-cancer therapy come ups concerns the beginning, those first moments when I was struck by the idea that cancer could be a fungus, and the motives and events that induced me to drift away from official oncology.
The whole thing began when I was assisting introductory lessons in histology. When the professor described tumours as a terrible and mysterious monster, I felt a reaction of pride , the same you feel when you are challenged: “Everybody’s powerless against me”; that was the implicit warning of cancer; “because your minds are too small to understand me”.
That moment a war started, my personal war against cancer. I was aware that I could win it only if I could focus all my resources and mental energy, conscious and unconscious, in the right direction, which I believed could be found only with a critical attitude about official thinking, thinking which is based on many ifs, but on very few certainties.
The biggest effort, therefore, consisted in first of all acquiring the necessary knowledge for the studies, while at the same time performing a critical analysis on anything I was studying; in other words, I had to keep well in mind that everything I was learning might well be false.
So the years went by, and through them my convictions gained strength; especially when later, working in hospital wards, I realized that medicine was not only unable to resolve the cancer problem, but also the majority of diseases. And that is still true today, unfortunately, since aside from a sectoral effectiveness in the treatment of specific symptoms of these diseases, medicine is unable to offer any conclusive benefit. In this category, we can list hypertension, diabetes, epilepsy, psoriasis, asthma, arthritis, Crohn’s Disease, and more.
Aside from distrust about the effectiveness of medicine, time and clinical experience had burdened my soul with a load of suffering that I was barely able to withstand and which, each time it was stimulated in the presence of desperate cases, caused me an existential crisis that at first pushed me toward running away but immediately after warned me to stay in the trenches, to fight to understand and try to find new solutions.
A little bit at a time, however, in the endless hours of the university’s paediatric oncological ambulatory ward where I was working to complete my thesis, my mind began to be free and started to abstract. Towards the end, I was almost unable to see the patients, their relatives, the professors, the colleagues, the nurses; even the people: I felt almost completely alienated from a system that I could feel and believed was totally bankrupt.
I asked myself, and my profession, the university career, my social position, where would they go?
After all, it would have been very difficult to live only with ideas, especially in a medical world where personal spaces were shrinking every day, until almost exhausting any dignified options for work.
On the other hand, I was not particularly attracted by the university environment. In fact, I perceived it as an enmeshed and repulsive mass that prevented the achievement of any scientific goal, and where the best intellectual and personal resources could only be distracted from science and channelled towards irrelevant and superficial arguments.
At that point, my road was marked. I abandoned the faculty of medicine and enrolled to achieve a degree in physics. I followed the courses for several years with the intent of acquiring a more scientific mentality and of getting into those infinitesimal dimensions of study that I felt I had to explore in detail.
At the same time, I started to get in touch with other medical realities and with that alternative medicine which, although officially ridiculed, had many followers, especially amongst those patients who could not stand excessively aggressive therapeutic methods. In experience after experience, I understood that the raison d’?tre of these alternative currents was in the inability of conventional medicine to solve the problems of patients who seemed, instead, to get greater benefits from those therapies which evaluated them and treated them in their wholeness and not only with limited symptomatological remedies.
It is when I was implementing a naturopathic set-up for my career that I had the idea that cancer could be caused by fungus. As I was treating a patient affected by psoriasis using corrosive salts, I understood that the salts worked because they were destroying something; and that something were fungi.
From that realization, my mind followed a syllogistic path that would have given me the solution I had been waiting for so long: if psoriasis, an incurable disease, is caused by a fungus, then it is possible that cancer, another incurable disease, could be caused by a fungus. That link was what started all the experiences, the experiments, the verifications and the results, through relentless and “underground” work that brought great professional satisfaction to me and that allowed me to perfect a therapy that is very efficacious against neoplastic masses, that is, against fungin colonies.
Once the causal role of fungi in neoplastic proliferation was hypothesized, the problem of how to attack them in the intimacy of the tissues arose, since in those areas it was not possible to use salts that were too strong. It then came to my mind that in the oro-pharyngeal candidosis of breastfed babies, sodium bicarbonate was a quick and powerful weapon capable of eliminating the disease in three of four days. I thought that if I could administer high concentrations orally or intravenously, I might be able to obtain the same result. So I started my tests and my experiments, which provided me immediately with tangible results.
Amongst these, one of the first patients I treated was an 11-year-old child, a case which immediately gave me the indication that I was following the right path. The child arrived in coma at the paediatric haematology ward around 11:30 in the morning, with a clinical history of leukemia. Because of the disease, the child was carried from a small town in Sicily to Rome, going through the universities of Palermo and Naples, where he underwent several chemotherapy sessions. The desperate mother told me that she had been unable to speak with the child since 15 days earlier; that is, since the child had departed on his journey through hospitals. She said she would have given the world to hear her son?s voice once again before he died. As I was of the opinion that the child was comatose both because of brain invasion by the fungin colonies and because of the toxicity of the therapies that had been performed, I concluded that if I could destroy the colonies with sodium bicarbonate salts and at the same time nourish and detoxify the brain with glucose phleboclysis, I could hope for a regression of the symptomatology.
And so it was. After a continuous infusion with phleboclysis of bicarbonate and glucose solutions, at around 19.00 hours as I was coming back to the university, I found the child speaking with his mother, who was crying.
Since then, I have continued on my path and I have been able to treat and to cure several people, especially during a period of three years during which I was a voluntary assistant at the Regina Elena Tumour Institute in Rome. In 1990, although I was almost completely occupied in a diabetes centre, because of changes in my personal life, I decided to intensify my studies and my research in the field of cancer, a disease that was always foremost in my mind, although in recent years I had been forced to neglect it.
Before resuming my war against cancer, however, I felt the need to better explore the logical contents of medicine and thus of oncology so that I could acquire those rational, critical and auto-critical instruments needed to understand where errors could be hidden.
I enrolled in a course for a philosophy degree which I completed in 1996. That was the year when, this time steadily, I started my contacts with the world of oncology again, attempting first of all to make my theories and treatment methods known, especially within the most accredited institutions.
So, the Ministry of Health, Italian and foreign oncological institutes, and oncological associations were made aware of my studies and my results, but there was no acknowledgment at all. All I could find were colleagues, more or less qualified, who tended to be condescending and who seemed only to be able to speak the magic word: genetics.
“We’ll never get to heaven like that,” I mused. In fact, I found myself in a situation with no way out. I had so many great ideas and some positive results, but no opportunity to check them with patients affected by tumour in an authoritative scientific context.
I chose to be patient and to continue to get results, treating patient after patient and at the same time trying to get known by as many people as possible, especially in the environment of those alternative medicines where at least there was openness and an opportunity to contact professionals who already had a critical attitude towards official medical thought. It was in that process that, for the lack of any alternative, I started my navigation on the internet. There, I soon found those contacts, those friends, and those consensuses that allowed me to spread my theories but; even more importantly; they gave me the psychological thrust needed to continue my personal fight against a sea of sterility and self-evidence in official medicine.
I took comfort from the knowledge that my idea, my little torch, would not go out but could take root somewhere. I started to hope again that, given the good validity of the message, sooner or later it would find a way to be shared and accepted by an ever-growing number of people. Slowly, I was able in that way to get my oncological infective theory known and to expose it to the public through conferences, interviews, conventions. All that widened my field of action and gave me the opportunity to accumulate a remarkable amount of experience and of clinical results.
Friends made me understand, however, that my therapies with sodium bicarbonate solution, although they were effective, needed a methodological evolution, as some types of cancer could either not be reached in any way or reached in an insufficient manner.
Sodium bicarbonate administered orally, via aerosol or intravenously can achieve positive results only in some neoplasias, while others; such as the serious ones of the brain or the bones — remain unaffected by the treatment. For these reasons, I got in touch with several colleagues, especially interventionist radiologists, and I was finally able to reach those areas of the body that had previously been inaccessible. This was achieved through positioning appropriate catheters either in cavities for peritoneum and pleura, or in arteries to reach other organs.
The basic concept of my therapy is the administration of a solution with a high content of sodium bicarbonate directly onto tumours. These are susceptible to regression only if one destroys the fungal colonies.
It was the ongoing search for ever more effective techniques to allow me to get as close as possible to the inner tissues that led me to the idea of selective arteriography (visualization using instruments on specific arteries) and positioning an arterial port-a-cath (devices joining the catheter). These methods make it possible to place a small catheter directly into the artery that nourishes the tumour, and administer high doses of sodium bicarbonate to the deepest recesses of the tumour.
In the past, for example, when I had the opportunity to treat a brain tumour, although I was able to improve the condition of the patient, I could not treat the tumorous mass at a deep enough level. I have countless times wasted my breath begging neurologists and neurosurgeons to perform the operation of inserting the catheter so that I could use it to do a further local treatment.
Today, with selective arteriography of carotids, it is possible to reach any cerebral mass without surgical intervention and in a completely painless manner. By the same token, almost all organs can be treated and can benefit from bicarbonate salts therapy, which is harmless, fast and effective; with only the exception of some bone areas such as vertebrae and ribs, where the scarce arterial irrigation does not allow sufficient dosage to reach the targets.
Selective arteriography therefore represents a very powerful weapon against fungus that can always be used against tumours, firstly because it is painless and provokes no side effects, and secondly because the risks are very low.
Technically, it is performed as follows: after sterilizing and anesthetizing the surface levels, a needle is introduced into the artery that is to be used as an inlet port (usually the sub-clavian); then a metal guide that is visible to the angiologist is inserted and can be used to locate the selected artery. The last step consists of getting the small catheter to administer the solution where necessary. Then the catheter is fitted to a subcutaneous port-a-cath that stays in the selected location as long as necessary.
This very low-risk intervention creates no more pain than an intravenous injection and allows patients to be treated at home, although under constant medical supervision.
Further information and contact details via this link:
Reprint of web pages are only allowed with explicit permission. Please request our permission by emailing us with a complete description of the intended use.