Cancer - - A Fungus?..........

[elye]

I wasn't sure where to place this link as it deals with candida, but as so many members here are effected by fungal overgrowth and some connections have been made between it and gluten intolerance, I figured it fit best here.

This is a remarkable piece of film to watch, featuring an interview with Dr. Tullio Simoncini. I was left tearing up with my mouth hung open by the end of it. I'm not certain if the idea of cancer being a fungus has been discussed here at any length, but I'd love to talk about it again if it has!

A must watch:

Open Original Shared Link

[ShayFL]

I watched/read that this morning. It is interesting. But think of this, the body has many amazing ways of dealing with "invaders" whether they be bacteria/virus/fungi/toxins. One way the body reacts is to completely surround the "invader" with tissue....i.e. forms a cyst or tumor.

I think cancer can be caused by many triggers. Not just fungi.

I did some research. All of his work is not "successful". He has success with those whose tumors are a result of "fungi". Others that did not fair well (some even died) may have had cancer from another cause...say a virus.

It is certainly a good idea to get rid of Candida overgrowth and heal your intestines.

[Calicoe]

This is of extreme interest to me because I am suffering with an illness which I first thought to be celiac disease, but now am increasingly convinced in Candida A. I intuitively new that this could turn into cancer. I have removed wheat and struggle with dairy, but it seems like I am sick everyday and am allergic to everything. I seriously feel like I need help and I don't know what to do. I am completely depressed. I am a victim of this economy right now and do not have health insurance, and cannot afford a naturopath.

Anyone with much needed advice? I feel like I am at the end of my rope.

[ShayFL]

If money is a concern, then you should go on an Anti-Candida diet. Google and you will find info. for FREE. And eat lots of garlic/oregano/coconut oil...as these kill Candida. Eat lots of yogurt (non-dairy if you have to). There is no reason to do nothing. And there is ALWAYS hope!

[Calicoe]

Thanks so much. I am going to do the garlic/oregano/coconut. I think I heard that it should be virgin coconut oil. I am having trouble sticking to my allergy diet (stick with wheat, but have trouble with dairy and beer), but I want desperately to be health again.

Do you have any suggestions about how often with the garlic/oil of oregano/coconut?

[ShayFL]

The diet will be KEY! And the BEER has to go. Sorry. The money you save on beer could go toward some probiotics in pill form. And even some anti-candida supplements too.

I would only use coconut oil and olive oil for your oil needs. Except fish oil...that is o.k. You can buy oil of oregano pretty inexpensively. And enjoy garlic in all of your savory dishes and salads.

[Calicoe]

OK Shay, I looked up the diet on various websites. I am motivated. I am going to give up beer and chocolate, and everything else. I am truly in bad shape, and very depressed. I have to get my life back, and the key is diet. I'm going to do it. Thanks so much for your help and encouragement.

I will check in again this week.

[jerseyangel]

Calicoe--

Good luck with it!

[Calicoe]

Thanks so much for all your help, you guys. I'm crying now. I have to go and do cover letters. In addition to bad health, I'm totally broke and underemployed.

Talk soon.

[veggienft]

Dr. Simoncini's hypothesis is that all cancers are made of candida albicans fungus. From the articles I've read Dr. Simoncini's evidence lies in his ability to cure any cancer by treating the candida. If that's true, his evidence is not proof that candida makes up all cancer.

It's proof that candida is required support for all cancer. That means candida likely causes all cancer. But it doesn't mean candida IS all cancer.

Open Original Shared Link

-------------------------------------------------------------------

.......Since early 2007, Dr. Melanie Schmidt and biologist Ulrike K

[Jestgar]

To the one article discussing a clinical trial from one year ago, let me add:

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Cancer is a multifactorial disease. Your risk of getting it is probably linked to genetics, exposures, and lifestyle.

I doubt that there will ever be "one cure fits all".

[ShayFL]

And it just makes sense that if something is depleting the body (Candida or something else) if you eliminate that issue, the body is then clear to heal itself. NO IT DOES NOT PROVE THAT CANDIDA CAUSES ALL CANCERS. It may very well be the other way around. It could mean that Cancers deplete the body and allow Candida to thrive. Could be a vicious cycle. Anything you can do to detoxify and clear the path for healing is good and cancer could be healed.

This includes emotional toxins as well. There are quite a few documented cases of cancer cures by emotional healing (even laughter). Doctors call it "spontaneous healing". But in these cases the irritant was not Candida...it was emotional baggage.

No one theory is correct.

[Ursa Major]

I wasn't sure where to place this link as it deals with candida, but as so many members here are effected by fungal overgrowth and some connections have been made between it and gluten intolerance, I figured it fit best here.

This is a remarkable piece of film to watch, featuring an interview with Dr. Tullio Simoncini. I was left tearing up with my mouth hung open by the end of it. I'm not certain if the idea of cancer being a fungus has been discussed here at any length, but I'd love to talk about it again if it has!

A must watch:

Open Original Shared Link

Wow, it completely confirms what my own research has shown, and what I have been saying (and getting blasted for regularly). I completely believe what this doctor is saying.

Also, I had always assumed that when biopsies of tumours are done, that they actually biopsy the INSIDE of the tumour! It appears that is not the case at all. So, if they don't cut open the tumours and only test the outside wall of it, how can they tell what is the problem? It blows my mind.

provides energy only from high-quality plant oils, such as hempseed and linseed oil, and protein from soy and animal products

This project is bound for failure, as cutting out animal fat and replacing it with vegetable fat only has been shown to CAUSE cancer. Plus, soy is so unhealthy, that it also won't be helpful.

Jestgar, there is ZERO evidence that high fat diets are linked to ANY type of cancer, unless those fats are trans-fats (hydrogenated fats). Those articles say general things like, 'it has long been known that high fat diets cause cancer'. They are not giving any concrete evidence, because there simply is none.

In fact, it has been shown that low fat diets cause heart attacks (saturated fat is the heart's fuel), and that diets high in vegetable oils and low in saturated fat cause breast cancer in women and colon cancer in men.

[elye]

Also, I had always assumed that when biopsies of tumours are done, that they actually biopsy the INSIDE of the tumour! It appears that is not the case at all. So, if they don't cut open the tumours and only test the outside wall of it, how can they tell what is the problem? It blows my mind.

Ursula, I remember you mentioning that you are a big reader of Dr. Joseph Mercola, as I am. He just makes so much sense, and this interview fits in perfectly with everything he purports.

I, too, always thought that surgeons cut INTO the tumours and tested what is inside.....it really is incredibe that they don't do this. In fact, I still find it hard to believe. Do they actually NOT do something so obviously necessary? 'Tis mind-boggling.........

[Jestgar]

Also, I had always assumed that when biopsies of tumours are done, that they actually biopsy the INSIDE of the tumour! It appears that is not the case at all. So, if they don't cut open the tumours and only test the outside wall of it, how can they tell what is the problem? It blows my mind.

I, too, always thought that surgeons cut INTO the tumours and tested what is inside.....it really is incredibe that they don't do this. In fact, I still find it hard to believe. Do they actually NOT do something so obviously necessary? 'Tis mind-boggling.........

They do, of course.

Ursula, if you could post links to actually studies showing any of your claims I would appreciate it.

[elye]

They do, of course.

Gawd, I would think that they would have to..... . .and I know that you know what you're talking about, Jess. So why is this respected oncologist claiming that it isn't happening? I'm all confuzzled.......

[jerseyangel]

I don't understand this either, and I'd like to.

I thought they sliced the tumor into thin slices (for want of a better word) and examined them under a microscope.

Don't laugh, Jess--

[Jestgar]

I don't know that he's respected. I don't know anything about him either way. I couldn't watch the whole video, but I did notice that within the first few minutes he tells you that this stuff is a) cancer, fungus (because it's white, and c) that the fungus is actually inside and that's why biopsy don't show the fungus.

He never shows any data to support that these are a) cancerous growths, that there is fungus either outside or inside, or that biopsy are incomplete.

That's about as far as I got...

[Jestgar]

I thought they sliced the tumor into thin slices (for want of a better word) and examined them under a microscope.

This and more. They use different staining techniques to bring out different cellular features. They attempt to grow up cultures to see if anything untoward is living there. They may do antibody staining if they're suspicious of just a few things. Or PCR for the same reason. That little chunk of tissue is examined in as many ways as possible.

[elye]

Hmmmmmm.....all very interesting. I must watch the clip again, and try to think like our Jess.

There is always the danger with me that I will begin to focus on the grammar in the dialogue.... ..then all is lost scientifically, I fear...... . . ...

[Ursa Major]

They do, of course.

Could you please show evidence that they actually do?

Ursula, if you could post links to actually studies showing any of your claims I would appreciate it.

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

[veggienft]

I just watched the video ......Very interesting!

Dr. Simoncini brings up an interesting point about fungus genetics. Fungi survive in colonies, with literally hundreds of genetic codes. Genetic diversity is how fungus colonies survive. If an outside influence such as heat ......or moisture ......or chemicals .....or light threatens the colony, it only kills off the fungus which won't adapt. The fungi with genetics which allows them to survive fill in the colony.

To celiacs it means candida is probably adapted to mimic both human endorphin and wheat gluten in order to span the intestine walls. Many posters here have testified that they stopped eating glutenous grains, and alleviated their celiac symptoms .......only to develop intolerances to other foods. The likely cause is candida adapting to mimic other foods in order to continue reaching through the intestine walls.

[elye]

Dr. Simoncini brings up an interesting point about fungus genetics. Fungi survive in colonies, with literally hundreds of genetic codes. Genetic diversity is how fungus colonies survive.

Yes, this, for me, was one of the most interesting things Dr. Simoncini speaks about here - - the incredible adaptibility of fungal colonies. The possible link you mention, veggienft, between the new food sensitivities that many celiacs develop when going gluten-free and fungal invasion makes good sense to me.

I guess my great big question, after ruminating over it last night, is this: Such a ridiculously simple, cheap and harmless proceedure that Dr. Simoncini claims to be using to rid the body of some cancerous tumours.......why is it not being even attempted here?

Even if he is a quack, there is absolutely nothing to lose in trying this proceedure, except perhaps a few days while the baking soda is being administered. Is the answer that there is something else to be lost.....the reputation, the integrity of our oncology masters? Flushing away cancerous tumours with baking soda flies very much in the face of the complicated, relatively intellectual and high-tech methods of chemo and radiation.

Is there a monetary reason? The cancer departments within our national health care system, and the doctors and techs working there, would take a big hit.....baking soda is cheap, and the adminstration of it is fast.....not to mention the effect it would have on Big Pharma - - it's baking soda, not a very costly drug.

I'm no medical mind, unfortunately, so I may be missing something big, here. Is this proceedure risky somehow? Riskier than radiation, chemo, strong, scary drugs?

Nothing to lose.......I don't get it.

[Jestgar]

If I wanted to change the alkalinity of my body I'd do something much more fun than chugging baking soda - like a drinking binge or something.

Hmm, maybe there's something there. Do alcoholics ever get cancer???

[Jestgar]

Could you please show evidence that they actually do?

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Only gotten this far. These are 10 years or more old. Cite something within the last 5 years (preferably with links to studies, not just someone's opinion.)

And the Mercola page - same 10 year old study (these all discuss the same study) and no references.

Next 4 -same study