Is Tullio Simoncini and his shady background legitimate to begin with?

[Guest guest]

That is an excellent observation, Marc.

 

I think another question is - what about Simoncini's shady background?

While thousands are now embracing the latest cancer fad and jumping

blindly on the bandwagon, no one is looking at what may be lying in

the shadows behind the spotlight Simoncini basks in.

 

Are we really to believe that an obscure doctor from Italy with nary a

mention in PubMed in over 20 years of claimed practice has discovered

a breakthrough for cancer? Does anyone wonder how that Simoncini's own

website fails to mention his educational background - or note that

Italy is famous for medical degrees that are obtained in exchange for

cash?

 

How about the convictions for fraud and manslaughter that caused him

to flee Italy when a patient died as a direct result of his treatment

and not from cancer? Or the three other reported deaths caused by his

treatments?

 

No one seems to be reporting on the Danish clinic where Simoncini was

reported to have been called in and no one improved but one patient

died from his treatment. Or where all the patient records are of all

his alleged successes. Of the few testimonials, at least two have had

serious doubts about whether the patient ever had cancer in the first

place and whether there was financial considerations exchanged for the

testimonies (one was reported to have been Simoncini's mistress at one

time).

 

There may be some validity to Simoncini's work - fungus is present

SOME of the time when cancer is present and increasing oxygen to the

cellular level is effective for both fungus and cancer. But I am

afraid that people may be rushing blindly into something that is

neither as safe nor as effective as advertised.

 

 

oleander soup , " Marc " <marcswan wrote:

>

> The real question is whether the baking soda will ever reach the

battery terminals if you put it into the fuel tank.

> Marc Swanepoel

>

> -

> Md29again

> oleander soup

> Sunday, August 10, 2008 10:22 PM

> Re: Re: Cancer is a fungus. Tullio

Simoncini M.D.

>

>

>

>

> Hi...

>

> Let's get logical here and think outside the box.

>

> Do you know that batteries in vehicles get acidic around the

posts.... do you know what happens when you put baking soda on those

areas?

>

> Disintegrates immediately.

>

> Mary

>

>

>

> -Mary 970-282-8551

>

>

> In a message dated 08/10/08 08:33:04 Mountain Daylight Time,

luellamay129 writes:

> Hi Andrew,

>

> Thank you for sharing your findings with us. However, it is

always best

> to be discerning with regard to certain cancer theories. In reply to

> your post, I am going to copy a link to another forum where

Tony, aka

> dquixote1217, addresses this very subject.

>

> http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1232539#i

>

> Hugs,

>

>

>

>

>

 

> It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets

that make the grade on AOL Shopping.

>

[Guest guest]

Tony,Look back at my posting on this subject and my personal, one-on-one experience with this man.Allen> oleander soup > Sun, 10 Aug 2008 23:49:36 +0000> Is Tullio Simoncini and his shady background legitimate to begin with?> > That is an excellent observation, Marc.> > I think another question is - what about Simoncini's shady background?> While thousands are now embracing the latest cancer fad and jumping> blindly on the bandwagon, no one is looking at what may be lying in> the shadows behind the spotlight Simoncini basks in.> > Are we really to believe that an obscure doctor from Italy with nary a> mention in PubMed in over 20 years of claimed practice has discovered> a breakthrough for cancer? Does anyone wonder how that Simoncini's own> website fails to mention his educational background - or note that> Italy is famous for medical degrees that are obtained in exchange for> cash?> > How about the convictions for fraud and manslaughter that caused him> to flee Italy when a patient died as a direct result of his treatment> and not from cancer? Or the three other reported deaths caused by his> treatments?> > No one seems to be reporting on the Danish clinic where Simoncini was> reported to have been called in and no one improved but one patient> died from his treatment. Or where all the patient records are of all> his alleged successes. Of the few testimonials, at least two have had> serious doubts about whether the patient ever had cancer in the first> place and whether there was financial considerations exchanged for the> testimonies (one was reported to have been Simoncini's mistress at one> time).> > There may be some validity to Simoncini's work - fungus is present> SOME of the time when cancer is present and increasing oxygen to the> cellular level is effective for both fungus and cancer. But I am> afraid that people may be rushing blindly into something that is> neither as safe nor as effective as advertised.> > Tony> > oleander soup , "Marc" <marcswan wrote:> >> > The real question is whether the baking soda will ever reach the> battery terminals if you put it into the fuel tank.> > Marc Swanepoel> > > > - > > Md29again > > oleander soup > > Sunday, August 10, 2008 10:22 PM> > Re: Re: Cancer is a fungus. Tullio> Simoncini M.D.> > > > > > > > > > Hi...> > > > Let's get logical here and think outside the box.> > > > Do you know that batteries in vehicles get acidic around the> posts.... do you know what happens when you put baking soda on those> areas? > > > > Disintegrates immediately.> > > > Mary > > > > > > > > -Mary 970-282-8551 > > > > > > In a message dated 08/10/08 08:33:04 Mountain Daylight Time,> luellamay129 writes:> > Hi Andrew,> > > > Thank you for sharing your findings with us. However, it is> always best> > to be discerning with regard to certain cancer theories. In reply to> > your post, I am going to copy a link to another forum where> Tony, aka> > dquixote1217, addresses this very subject.> > > > http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1232539#i> > > > Hugs,> > > > > > > > > >> > > It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets> that make the grade on AOL Shopping.> >> > > > ---> >

[Guest guest]

I have never seen a cancer patient that

did not have candida/fungus over-growth. In fact, if the truth is known,

there is most probably a very high percentage of the population that suffers

from over-growth.

 

The requirements that you have mentioned

– many very good alternative practitioners have been accused of the same

thing. Being mentioned in PubMed is probably not a requirement for a good

doctor or researcher. J Also, I have seen many MD sponsored websites that

don’t give their educational information.

 

" Reports " are almost never the

whole truth. And when a method or protocol can be dis-credited by the

doctor’s past -- then it will be spread hoping people will believe that a

questionable past affects present or future believeability. I have never stopped

to ask an emergency room doctor about his past even though he/she may be making

some very important decisions for me. I believe that these are tactics of

conventional medicine, especially if the treatment proposed is natural and not

financially lucrative. If a doctor's past failures indicates his future, then

all medicine (including natural medicine) is most likely in trouble. ;o)

No one's past equals their future and many, many, many doctors have been guilty

of not using good judgement, thus loosing patients. Happens all the time with

cancer treatment and no one says a thing. And certainly every incident

can be made to sound " very dramatic " by whomever is doing the

reporting. We all know that the legal system is no friend to any doctor

that dares to step out of the conventional medicine box. Politics In

Healing by Dan Haley gives excellent examples of this. In fact, docs that

get the most heat or have those “shady backgrounds” many times the

ones that are out in the field truly looking for answers and thus are willing

to take chances on their reputation IF it means people might get well.

Dr. Burzynski, here in Houston, was made out to be a “shady” doc by

using “urine therapy” for cancer patients. We watched the “drama”

unfold and at that time were appalled that this doctor could even think of such

a thing. However, when I was diagnosed with cancer, who did we look at

first for natural treatment? Dr. B. because after study and research we

quickly realized that if he was in trouble with the powers that be, he was

probably doing something right. We found out quickly that his financial

requirements ($750 for a 30-40 minute initial visit plus $15,000.00 down in

case our insurance wouldn’t pay) were very prohibitive for us. I’m

glad we ended up chosing another route.

 

We are fortunate that we still have the freedom to choose whomever we think can

help us and we must protect that freedom because we may not have it for long.

Most people believed that I had lost my mind when I decided to go to a

chiropractor for cancer treatment, especially since MD Anderson was right down

the road. I saw what MD Anderson had to offer and experienced a month of

their recommended treatment. I truly believe that had I completed the six

months of the recommended chemo cocktail, I would not be here today. Want

to hear something funny? I didn’t even realize that my alternative

medicine doctor was a chiropracter until I received my first adjustment. You

see, credentials were not at the top of my Important List, because I had

already experienced what the “credentialed” doctors had to offer.

I wanted someone with answers, not credentials and fifteen letters after their

name. By the way, do you know that many conventional medicine doctors get all

those impressive letters added by paying for them or attending a weekend

seminar? If CODEX is ever implemented in the US, I predict that all MD’s

will magically become DN’s (doctors of nutrition) – overnight.

 

Fungus is pleomorphic (according to Dr. Rife), meaning that it has the ability

to change back and forth. And it can adapt very easily to environment, so

measuring and treating it effectively becomes somewhat of a challenge. It seems

that Dr. Simoncini has given much to think about. Dr. Simoncini has

brought forth to the public and medical community some very important possibilities.

Information that many docs (conventional & natural) have known about, but

couldn’t prove. Information that we probably need to heed. We must keep

an open-mind about cancer-treatment that does not harm the body. I don’t

know if Dr. Simoncini’s protocol will provide useful or not, perhaps it

will lay an important foundation for more research. I am going to give it the

benefit of the doubt, for now, because I have always believed that there could

be a fungal and/or viral component to cancer…and I still do.

 

Most every useful natural medicine treatment was once thought to be quackery

because it was soon found out that it didn’t get results every single

time. In other words, it didn’t perform “as advertised”

or “as thought” that it would. As I have said before, I

highly doubt that there will ever be a works-all-the-time-on-everybody cure for

cancer. There are too many factors that come into play. The

emotional aspect of cancer is HUGE. Conventional medicine has done a great

job in making people believe that no one is ever cured of cancer. Thus they

have taken away HOPE and BELIEF. Two of the most needed ingrediients to

be healed. I call this “emotional rape” and believe that

every oncologist or Dr. that pronounces a death sentence or indicates that

there is no-hope should be sued and have their license taken away.

 

I believe it is more about the terrain of the body more than anything

else. If the terrain (body, mind and spirit) is unfavorable for cancer to

exist then it cannot take hold. But the standard American toxic lifestyle,

toxic environment, toxic emotions, etc. unfortunately provides an

excellent terrain for dis-ease. We must promote prevention and educate

people that conventional medicine is not the safety-net that they think it will

be should they become dis-eased. For those that get a cancer diagnosis,

the education process needs to be about changing the terrain of the whole

body. It’s not easy, but it is very doable and it can work.

It worked for me and I have seen it work for others.

 

I suspect this post will not be nominated for “post of the year”. ;o)

Will dodge tomatoes tomorrow. J

 

Have a great week, everyone!

 

Be Well

Loretta

 

 

 

 

 

-----Original

Message-----

 

That is an excellent observation, Marc.

 

I

think another question is - what about Simoncini's shady background? While

thousands are now embracing the latest cancer fad and jumping blindly on the

bandwagon, no one is looking at what may be lying in

the

shadows behind the spotlight Simoncini basks in.

 

Are

we really to believe that an obscure doctor from Italy with nary a mention in

PubMed in over 20 years of claimed practice has discovered a breakthrough for

cancer? Does anyone wonder how that Simoncini's own

website

fails to mention his educational background - or note that Italy is famous for

medical degrees that are obtained in exchange for cash?

 

How

about the convictions for fraud and manslaughter that caused him to flee Italy

when a patient died as a direct result of his treatment and not from

cancer? Or the three other reported deaths caused by his

treatments?

 

No

one seems to be reporting on the Danish clinic where Simoncini was reported to

have been called in and no one improved but one patient died from his

treatment. Or where all the patient records are of all

his

alleged successes. Of the few testimonials, at least two have had serious

doubts about whether the patient ever had cancer in the first place and whether

there was financial considerations exchanged for the

testimonies

(one was reported to have been Simoncini's mistress at one time).

 

There

may be some validity to Simoncini's work - fungus is present SOME of the time

when cancer is present and increasing oxygen to the cellular level is effective

for both fungus and cancer. But I am afraid that people may be rushing

blindly into something that is neither as safe nor as effective as advertised.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Actually, I rather like your post. You are right, Simoncini has given

people a lot to think about. I agree that fungus is often present

along with cancers, but disagree that cancer is a fungus itself or

that fungus is a universal cause of cancer.

 

I surely would not want to be someone who criticized and helped

suppress the next Gerson, Hoxsey or Rife but I do not trust Simoncini

and view him much more as a promoter than a breakthrough innovator.

Plus, it is a matter of record that his treatments have killed

patients by inducing extreme alkalosis. His background and education

are hidden, his patient success records largely missing and his few

testimonials questionable.

 

And if you scroll back a bit you will find a post from one of our own

members about his experience when he went to see Simoncini.

 

He is not a doctor I would see if I had cancer, nor is the intravenous

administration of baking soda a treatment I would choose.

 

Yes, there is probably a very high percentage of the population who

suffers overgrowth, the same neglected health conditions that lead to

the overgrowth of fungus are also ones that lead to cancer and

overgrowth itself suppresses the immune system. They should all take

colloidal silver and coconut oil and clean up their diet and lifestyle.

 

Sorry, no tomatoes today - I intend to eat the ones I have for

breakfast along with some cantaloupe slices, a couple of eggs, grits

and whole grain toast with jam or honey and a big glass of orange

juice with pulp. Yumm!

 

 

oleander soup , " Dr. Loretta Lanphier "

<drlanphier wrote:

>

> I have never seen a cancer patient that did not have candida/fungus

> over-growth. In fact, if the truth is known, there is most probably

a very

> high percentage of the population that suffers from over-growth.

>

>

>

> The requirements that you have mentioned - many very good alternative

> practitioners have been accused of the same thing. Being mentioned in

> PubMed is probably not a requirement for a good doctor or

researcher. :-)

> Also, I have seen many MD sponsored websites that don't give their

> educational information.

>

>

>

> " Reports " are almost never the whole truth. And when a method or

protocol

> can be dis-credited by the doctor's past -- then it will be spread

hoping

> people will believe that a questionable past affects present or future

> believeability. I have never stopped to ask an emergency room doctor

about

> his past even though he/she may be making some very important

decisions for

> me. I believe that these are tactics of conventional medicine,

especially

> if the treatment proposed is natural and not financially lucrative. If a

> doctor's past failures indicates his future, then all medicine

(including

> natural medicine) is most likely in trouble. ;o) No one's past

equals their

> future and many, many, many doctors have been guilty of not using good

> judgement, thus loosing patients. Happens all the time with cancer

treatment

> and no one says a thing. And certainly every incident can be made

to sound

> " very dramatic " by whomever is doing the reporting. We all know

that the

> legal system is no friend to any doctor that dares to step out of the

> conventional medicine box. Politics In Healing by Dan Haley gives

excellent

> examples of this. In fact, docs that get the most heat or have

those " shady

> backgrounds " many times the ones that are out in the field truly

looking for

> answers and thus are willing to take chances on their reputation IF

it means

> people might get well. Dr. Burzynski, here in Houston, was made out

to be a

> " shady " doc by using " urine therapy " for cancer patients. We

watched the

> " drama " unfold and at that time were appalled that this doctor could

even

> think of such a thing. However, when I was diagnosed with cancer,

who did

> we look at first for natural treatment? Dr. B. because after study and

> research we quickly realized that if he was in trouble with the

powers that

> be, he was probably doing something right. We found out quickly

that his

> financial requirements ($750 for a 30-40 minute initial visit plus

> $15,000.00 down in case our insurance wouldn't pay) were very

prohibitive

> for us. I'm glad we ended up chosing another route.

>

> We are fortunate that we still have the freedom to choose whomever

we think

> can help us and we must protect that freedom because we may not have

it for

> long. Most people believed that I had lost my mind when I decided

to go to

> a chiropractor for cancer treatment, especially since MD Anderson

was right

> down the road. I saw what MD Anderson had to offer and experienced

a month

> of their recommended treatment. I truly believe that had I

completed the

> six months of the recommended chemo cocktail, I would not be here today.

> Want to hear something funny? I didn't even realize that my alternative

> medicine doctor was a chiropracter until I received my first

adjustment. You

> see, credentials were not at the top of my Important List, because I had

> already experienced what the " credentialed " doctors had to offer. I

wanted

> someone with answers, not credentials and fifteen letters after

their name.

> By the way, do you know that many conventional medicine doctors get all

> those impressive letters added by paying for them or attending a weekend

> seminar? If CODEX is ever implemented in the US, I predict that all

MD's

> will magically become DN's (doctors of nutrition) - overnight.

>

> Fungus is pleomorphic (according to Dr. Rife), meaning that it has the

> ability to change back and forth. And it can adapt very easily to

> environment, so measuring and treating it effectively becomes

somewhat of a

> challenge. It seems that Dr. Simoncini has given much to think

about. Dr.

> Simoncini has brought forth to the public and medical community some

very

> important possibilities. Information that many docs (conventional &

> natural) have known about, but couldn't prove. Information that we

probably

> need to heed. We must keep an open-mind about cancer-treatment that

does not

> harm the body. I don't know if Dr. Simoncini's protocol will

provide useful

> or not, perhaps it will lay an important foundation for more

research. I am

> going to give it the benefit of the doubt, for now, because I have

always

> believed that there could be a fungal and/or viral component to

cancer.and I

> still do.

>

> Most every useful natural medicine treatment was once thought to be

quackery

> because it was soon found out that it didn't get results every

single time.

> In other words, it didn't perform " as advertised " or " as thought "

that it

> would. As I have said before, I highly doubt that there will ever be a

> works-all-the-time-on-everybody cure for cancer. There are too many

factors

> that come into play. The emotional aspect of cancer is HUGE.

Conventional

> medicine has done a great job in making people believe that no one

is ever

> cured of cancer. Thus they have taken away HOPE and BELIEF. Two of the

> most needed ingrediients to be healed. I call this " emotional rape " and

> believe that every oncologist or Dr. that pronounces a death sentence or

> indicates that there is no-hope should be sued and have their

license taken

> away.

>

> I believe it is more about the terrain of the body more than

anything else.

> If the terrain (body, mind and spirit) is unfavorable for cancer to

exist

> then it cannot take hold. But the standard American toxic

lifestyle, toxic

> environment, toxic emotions, etc. unfortunately provides an excellent

> terrain for dis-ease. We must promote prevention and educate people

that

> conventional medicine is not the safety-net that they think it will be

> should they become dis-eased. For those that get a cancer

diagnosis, the

> education process needs to be about changing the terrain of the

whole body.

> It's not easy, but it is very doable and it can work. It worked for

me and

> I have seen it work for others.

>

> I suspect this post will not be nominated for " post of the year " .

;o) Will

> dodge tomatoes tomorrow. :-)

>

> Have a great week, everyone!

>

>

>

> Be Well

> Loretta

>

>

 

>

> That is an excellent observation, Marc.

>

>

>

> I think another question is - what about Simoncini's shady background?

> While thousands are now embracing the latest cancer fad and jumping

blindly

> on the bandwagon, no one is looking at what may be lying in

>

> the shadows behind the spotlight Simoncini basks in.

>

>

>

> Are we really to believe that an obscure doctor from Italy with nary a

> mention in PubMed in over 20 years of claimed practice has discovered a

> breakthrough for cancer? Does anyone wonder how that Simoncini's own

>

> website fails to mention his educational background - or note that

Italy is

> famous for medical degrees that are obtained in exchange for cash?

>

>

>

> How about the convictions for fraud and manslaughter that caused him

to flee

> Italy when a patient died as a direct result of his treatment and

not from

> cancer? Or the three other reported deaths caused by his

>

> treatments?

>

>

>

> No one seems to be reporting on the Danish clinic where Simoncini was

> reported to have been called in and no one improved but one patient died

> from his treatment. Or where all the patient records are of all

>

> his alleged successes. Of the few testimonials, at least two have had

> serious doubts about whether the patient ever had cancer in the

first place

> and whether there was financial considerations exchanged for the

>

> testimonies (one was reported to have been Simoncini's mistress at one

> time).

>

>

>

> There may be some validity to Simoncini's work - fungus is present

SOME of

> the time when cancer is present and increasing oxygen to the

cellular level

> is effective for both fungus and cancer. But I am afraid that

people may be

> rushing blindly into something that is neither as safe nor as

effective as

> advertised.

>

>

>

> >

[Guest guest]

I am very familiar with what you posted and have used your post in

other forums. Your experience reinforces my belief that Simoncini is

more interested in basking in the limelight and promoting himself and

his book than he is in true healing.

 

 

 

oleander soup , allen hahn <allen_hahn wrote:

>

>

> Tony,

>

> Look back at my posting on this subject and my personal, one-on-one

experience with this man.

>

> Allen

>

> > oleander soup

> >

> > Sun, 10 Aug 2008 23:49:36 +0000

> > Is Tullio Simoncini and his shady

background legitimate to begin with?

> >

> > That is an excellent observation, Marc.

> >

> > I think another question is - what about Simoncini's shady background?

> > While thousands are now embracing the latest cancer fad and jumping

> > blindly on the bandwagon, no one is looking at what may be lying in

> > the shadows behind the spotlight Simoncini basks in.

> >

> > Are we really to believe that an obscure doctor from Italy with nary a

> > mention in PubMed in over 20 years of claimed practice has discovered

> > a breakthrough for cancer? Does anyone wonder how that Simoncini's own

> > website fails to mention his educational background - or note that

> > Italy is famous for medical degrees that are obtained in exchange for

> > cash?

> >

> > How about the convictions for fraud and manslaughter that caused him

> > to flee Italy when a patient died as a direct result of his treatment

> > and not from cancer? Or the three other reported deaths caused by his

> > treatments?

> >

> > No one seems to be reporting on the Danish clinic where Simoncini was

> > reported to have been called in and no one improved but one patient

> > died from his treatment. Or where all the patient records are of all

> > his alleged successes. Of the few testimonials, at least two have had

> > serious doubts about whether the patient ever had cancer in the first

> > place and whether there was financial considerations exchanged for the

> > testimonies (one was reported to have been Simoncini's mistress at one

> > time).

> >

> > There may be some validity to Simoncini's work - fungus is present

> > SOME of the time when cancer is present and increasing oxygen to the

> > cellular level is effective for both fungus and cancer. But I am

> > afraid that people may be rushing blindly into something that is

> > neither as safe nor as effective as advertised.

> >

> > > >

> > oleander soup , " Marc " <marcswan@> wrote:

> > >

> > > The real question is whether the baking soda will ever reach the

> > battery terminals if you put it into the fuel tank.

> > > Marc Swanepoel

> > >

> > > -

> > > Md29again

> > > oleander soup

> > > Sunday, August 10, 2008 10:22 PM

> > > Re: Re: Cancer is a fungus. Tullio

> > Simoncini M.D.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Hi...

> > >

> > > Let's get logical here and think outside the box.

> > >

> > > Do you know that batteries in vehicles get acidic around the

> > posts.... do you know what happens when you put baking soda on those

> > areas?

> > >

> > > Disintegrates immediately.

> > >

> > > Mary

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > -Mary 970-282-8551

> > >

> > >

> > > In a message dated 08/10/08 08:33:04 Mountain Daylight Time,

> > luellamay129@ writes:

> > > Hi Andrew,

> > >

> > > Thank you for sharing your findings with us. However, it is

> > always best

> > > to be discerning with regard to certain cancer theories. In

reply to

> > > your post, I am going to copy a link to another forum where

> > Tony, aka

> > > dquixote1217, addresses this very subject.

> > >

> > > http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1232539#i

> > >

> > > Hugs,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

 

> > > It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets

> > that make the grade on AOL Shopping.

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Tony:

Actually, I rather like your post. You are right, Simoncini has given people a

lot to think about. I agree that fungus is often present along with

cancers, but disagree that cancer is a fungus itself or that fungus is a

universal cause of cancer.

 

Loretta: Fungus takes hold because

of an unhealthy immune system (makes the terrain hospitable), so does

cancer. I don’t think that fungus is a universal cause of cancer;

however, I do believe there is a high possibility that cancer is a fungus or

has fungal components.

 

Tony:

I surely would not want to be someone who criticized and helped suppress the

next Gerson, Hoxsey or Rife but I do not trust Simoncini and view him much more

as a promoter than a breakthrough innovator. Plus, it is a matter of record

that his treatments have killed patients by inducing extreme alkalosis. His

background and education are hidden, his patient success records largely

missing and his few testimonials questionable.

 

Loretta: Have you ever been to any type

of a medical convention/seminars (even some natural medicine seminars)?

If so then you know how entrepreneurial some doctors can be in promoting “their”

ideas, observations or protocols. I don’t think this is anything wrong

with this and it is definitely how some ideas or protocols become proven.

This is what the Cancer Control Society does every September. Certainly, many

of these conventions are fueled by ego in the highest of proportions and if you

can get through all the “stuff” you are likely to find some very

good information and ideas.

 

So many conventional medicine treatments

kill and maim, in fact, death by conventional medicine treatments is VERY

high. There are other things I could go into about patient records, etc. but

I won’t because of obvious reasons. You should know these reasons,

Tony.

 

Tony:

And if you scroll back a bit you will find a post from one of our own members

about his experience when he went to see Simoncini.

 

Loretta: While I am sorry for this

experience, a lot doctors do not have even kind-of perfect records in the

patient (bedside manner) department. This doesn’t excuse them, just

making a point. The surgeon that did my colon re-section is one of the

best in the US and certainly in Houston. His office was…well, very, very

nice and expensive looking (lots of money going through that office – showing

that gastrointestinal concerns are running rampant); however, his bedside

manner and communication skills were less than desirable…but I wasn’t

there to “like” him.

 

Most patient complaints are probably

justified, but some are not. Again, part of this is ego on the doctor’s

part and part of this can be unfair and extremely high expectations from

patients. Sometimes it is just plain miscommunication.

 

Anyway, a doctor’s bedside manner does not make him a good or a bad

doctor.

 

Tony:

He is not a doctor I would see if I had cancer, nor is the intravenous administration

of baking soda a treatment I would choose.

 

 

Loretta: Certainly we all have a right

to our opinion. But to be frank, people have absolutely no idea what they

would “really” do if they had cancer. We think we know and it’s

easy to say I would do ABC or wouldn’t do DEF, but when the rubber meets

the road it becomes a very different situation. I know this from experience.

 

Please understand that I am not defending Dr. Simoncini’s past because I

don’t know the facts and am not really concerned about them at this

point. I am defending the fact that what he is presenting may be VERY important

information in understanding the nature of cancer. A lot of bad things

have been said about a lot of very smart doctors. It’s usually the

ones that are “before their time” that get ragged on the

most. Natural medicine is often as guilty as conventional medicine in

having and open-mind.

 

Tony:

Yes, there is probably a very high percentage of the population who suffers

overgrowth, the same neglected health conditions that lead to the overgrowth of

fungus are also ones that lead to cancer and overgrowth itself suppresses the

immune system. They should all take colloidal silver and coconut oil and

clean up their diet and lifestyle.

 

Loretta: Not probably, but certainly and

it often goes undiagnosed until the concern is tremendous. Yes, if you

neglect your health and your emotions, then the terrain will be ripe. Unfortunately

colloidal silver and coconut oil do not always work by themselves and I

speak from clinical experience. Yes, certainly colloidal silver but other

products are also necessary in getting the whole body balanced – such as

digestive tract and parasite cleansing, effective probiotics and high-quality

oregano oil. Laktoferrin is also effective. A “healthy” diet

is also very foundational. Getting rid of fungus may look easy on paper,

but it takes discipline and perseverance to get the terrain back to balance.

 

Tony:

Sorry, no tomatoes today - I intend to eat the ones I have for breakfast along

with some cantaloupe slices, a couple of eggs, grits and whole grain toast with

jam or honey and a big glass of orange juice with pulp. Yumm!

 

Loretta: Thanks, hope they were good….I

have tasted some really good tomatoes this summer!

 

[Guest guest]

I think that cancer certainly has fungus-like qualities - but that

does not make it a fungus.

 

As for me - I DO know EXACTLY what I would do if I had cancer. I wrote

it down in a protocol. Now, if I had gotten cancer not many years ago,

I would have been at a rather desperate loss. As it is, I was at such

a loss when my cousin came down with cancer and all the information I

found was just overwhelming as I raced to find a way for him to stay

alive. Then I found oleander. And added more pieces to the puzzle as

time went by (and continue to find still more pieces).

 

I also know pretty much what I would NOT Do - and one of them is to go

to Simoncini for an intravenous baking soda treatment.

 

No, I have never been to a medical convention nor do I plan on it.

The hypocrisy of being part of the killing and symptom managing arts

would be too much for me - and I might get lynched as a heretic.

 

On the other hand, I have been to a holistic expo and found over half

of the exhibits to be preposterous.

 

The tomatoes were good. I even saved one for your reply - but I think

I will have eat it now instead.

 

BTW, what do you think of Schulze's Incurables Program?

 

Smiles,

 

 

 

 

 

oleander soup , " Dr. Loretta Lanphier "

<drlanphier wrote:

>

> Tony: Actually, I rather like your post. You are right, Simoncini

has given

> people a lot to think about. I agree that fungus is often present along

> with cancers, but disagree that cancer is a fungus itself or that

fungus is

> a universal cause of cancer.

>

>

>

> Loretta: Fungus takes hold because of an unhealthy immune system

(makes the

> terrain hospitable), so does cancer. I don't think that fungus is a

> universal cause of cancer; however, I do believe there is a high

possibility

> that cancer is a fungus or has fungal components.

>

>

>

> Tony: I surely would not want to be someone who criticized and helped

> suppress the next Gerson, Hoxsey or Rife but I do not trust

Simoncini and

> view him much more as a promoter than a breakthrough innovator.

Plus, it is

> a matter of record that his treatments have killed patients by inducing

> extreme alkalosis. His background and education are hidden, his patient

> success records largely missing and his few testimonials questionable.

>

>

>

> Loretta: Have you ever been to any type of a medical convention/seminars

> (even some natural medicine seminars)? If so then you know how

> entrepreneurial some doctors can be in promoting " their " ideas,

observations

> or protocols. I don't think this is anything wrong with this and it is

> definitely how some ideas or protocols become proven. This is what the

> Cancer Control Society does every September. Certainly, many of these

> conventions are fueled by ego in the highest of proportions and if

you can

> get through all the " stuff " you are likely to find some very good

> information and ideas.

>

>

>

> So many conventional medicine treatments kill and maim, in fact,

death by

> conventional medicine treatments is VERY high. There are other things I

> could go into about patient records, etc. but I won't because of obvious

> reasons. You should know these reasons, Tony.

>

>

>

> Tony: And if you scroll back a bit you will find a post from one of

our own

> members about his experience when he went to see Simoncini.

>

> Loretta: While I am sorry for this experience, a lot doctors do not have

> even kind-of perfect records in the patient (bedside manner) department.

> This doesn't excuse them, just making a point. The surgeon that did my

> colon re-section is one of the best in the US and certainly in

Houston. His

> office was.well, very, very nice and expensive looking (lots of

money going

> through that office - showing that gastrointestinal concerns are running

> rampant); however, his bedside manner and communication skills were less

> than desirable.but I wasn't there to " like " him.

>

>

>

> Most patient complaints are probably justified, but some are not.

Again,

> part of this is ego on the doctor's part and part of this can be

unfair and

> extremely high expectations from patients. Sometimes it is just plain

> miscommunication.

>

> Anyway, a doctor's bedside manner does not make him a good or a bad

doctor.

>

>

>

>

> Tony: He is not a doctor I would see if I had cancer, nor is the

intravenous

> administration of baking soda a treatment I would choose.

>

>

>

> Loretta: Certainly we all have a right to our opinion. But to be frank,

> people have absolutely no idea what they would " really " do if they had

> cancer. We think we know and it's easy to say I would do ABC or

wouldn't do

> DEF, but when the rubber meets the road it becomes a very different

> situation. I know this from experience.

>

> Please understand that I am not defending Dr. Simoncini's past because I

> don't know the facts and am not really concerned about them at this

point. I

> am defending the fact that what he is presenting may be VERY important

> information in understanding the nature of cancer. A lot of bad

things have

> been said about a lot of very smart doctors. It's usually the ones

that are

> " before their time " that get ragged on the most. Natural medicine

is often

> as guilty as conventional medicine in having and open-mind.

>

>

>

> Tony: Yes, there is probably a very high percentage of the

population who

> suffers overgrowth, the same neglected health conditions that lead

to the

> overgrowth of fungus are also ones that lead to cancer and

overgrowth itself

> suppresses the immune system. They should all take colloidal silver and

> coconut oil and clean up their diet and lifestyle.

>

>

>

> Loretta: Not probably, but certainly and it often goes undiagnosed

until the

> concern is tremendous. Yes, if you neglect your health and your

emotions,

> then the terrain will be ripe. Unfortunately colloidal silver and

coconut

> oil do not always work by themselves and I speak from clinical

experience.

> Yes, certainly colloidal silver but other products are also necessary in

> getting the whole body balanced - such as digestive tract and parasite

> cleansing, effective probiotics and high-quality oregano oil.

Laktoferrin is

> also effective. A " healthy " diet is also very foundational.

Getting rid of

> fungus may look easy on paper, but it takes discipline and

perseverance to

> get the terrain back to balance.

>

>

>

> Tony: Sorry, no tomatoes today - I intend to eat the ones I have for

> breakfast along with some cantaloupe slices, a couple of eggs, grits and

> whole grain toast with jam or honey and a big glass of orange juice with

> pulp. Yumm!

>

> Loretta: Thanks, hope they were good..I have tasted some really good

> tomatoes this summer!

>

[Guest guest]

Glad I escaped at least one tomato today.

Sorry you felt like you had to hold on to one just-in-case, but hopefully eating

it will benefit you more than throwing it. J

 

Going to a medical convention is not

even close to my favorite thing to do. However, because I do a lot of natural

hormonal balancing for women, most of the nautral (bio-identical) hormone

seminars/conventions include the conventional medicine docs. Mind you, it’s

not because conventional drs believe bio-identical hormones are effective (most

don’t) but they want to be able to offer them because 1) women ask for

it; 2) makes them look like they know all about “natural” hromone

balancing and thus believe it will work; 3) brings in extra money. In all

fairness, not all are like this, but more than a few fit the bill and they are

pretty darn proud of themselves.

 

I love Dr. Schultze’s philosophy and I share much of it. J He has been at this much

longer than I have and I respect him greatly. Obviously, what I would

suggest product-wise is different as I believe we now have some hi-tech

products available so that so many supplements do not have to be taken. I

do love his “tell-it-like-it-is, no-foolishness-allowed mentality. Dr.

Kelley was the same way, I believe. This is exactly what it takes to heal

from cancer. Many think this is just too harsh, but wallowing in

self-destructive thoughts and conversation just brings a person’s

emotional health further down. Every one needs a support sytem or coach to help

them through the “woe is me” times. And if we don’t

understand anything else, we MUST understand and BELIEVE that there is ALWAYS,

ALWAYS HOPE and ALWAYS ANSWERS to every health concern. Prayer is a MUST.

 

I question the juice fasting for the

very ill. Sometimes this is exactly what is needed because it is all they

can handle, but often a bit more solid food or a good whey protein is needed

for strength and repair. Detoxifying a very ill person is difficult, at best

and it must be taken very slowly. I do not believe that juicing fruit by

itself is best for those with cancer. Even Dr. B suggested putting ground

flaxseeds in fruit juice. I believe that we should eat fruits (synergistic

effect and helps reduce insulin spike) and juice and eat vegetables (steamed or

raw). My diet, while healing, was between 90-95% raw. I was allowed an

organic baked potato (red), organic sweet potato, organic oatmeal or organic

brown rice for lunch along with my raw vegetables, if I wanted it. The

diet that I recommend now is a combination of the BP and what I did.

 

Dr. Schulze focuses a lot on cleansing and detoxification and I totally agree.

In my opinion, if this is not done FIRST and repeated several times (many docs

advocate only one cleanse, but it takes many more than one to cleanse a toxic

and sick body), then the chances of healing completely are greatly

impaired. Putting healthy food, good supplements, good water, etc. into a

toxic digestive tract and body does not make sense. I believe this is one

of the reasons that some protocols do not get the success that they claim.

Another reason is because the protoco doesn’t work synergistically.

 

So, in a nut-shell, I think Dr. Schulze has a good protocol even though it

employs some things that may not be necessary for every individual.

Everyone is so different and this must be taken into account when using cancer

protocols -- our body, emotions, environment are not a one-size-fits all.

 

Be Well

Loretta

 

 

 

 

-----Original

Message-----

 

 

The

tomatoes were good. I even saved one for your reply - but I think I will have

eat it now instead.

 

BTW,

what do you think of Schulze's Incurables Program?

 

Smiles,

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I pretty much agree with all you said - and that is a good thing

since, although I am momentarily out of tomatoes tonight I do have a

spare watermelon. : ^ )

 

I have been eating the heck out of both watermelons and tomatoes

lately. And the cantaloupes are getting good now too. Throw in a few

good peaches, nectarines, strawberries and blueberries and I will be

in fresh fruit heaven. About time for a good honeydew melon too. Has

anyone tried the golden honeydews yet? They keep calling my name when

I walk through the produce section . . .

 

In a couple of weeks I plan on purchasing a juicer and doing some

pretty extensive juice feasting with a bit of Boku powder added.

 

 

 

 

oleander soup , " Dr. Loretta Lanphier "

<drlanphier wrote:

>

> Glad I escaped at least one tomato today. Sorry you felt like you had to

> hold on to one just-in-case, but hopefully eating it will benefit

you more

> than throwing it. :-)

>

>

>

> Going to a medical convention is not even close to my favorite thing

to do.

> However, because I do a lot of natural hormonal balancing for women,

most of

> the nautral (bio-identical) hormone seminars/conventions include the

> conventional medicine docs. Mind you, it's not because conventional drs

> believe bio-identical hormones are effective (most don't) but they

want to

> be able to offer them because 1) women ask for it; 2) makes them

look like

> they know all about " natural " hromone balancing and thus believe it will

> work; 3) brings in extra money. In all fairness, not all are like

this, but

> more than a few fit the bill and they are pretty darn proud of

themselves.

>

> I love Dr. Schultze's philosophy and I share much of it. :-) He has

been at

> this much longer than I have and I respect him greatly. Obviously,

what I

> would suggest product-wise is different as I believe we now have some

> hi-tech products available so that so many supplements do not have to be

> taken. I do love his " tell-it-like-it-is, no-foolishness-allowed

mentality.

> Dr. Kelley was the same way, I believe. This is exactly what it

takes to

> heal from cancer. Many think this is just too harsh, but wallowing in

> self-destructive thoughts and conversation just brings a person's

emotional

> health further down. Every one needs a support sytem or coach to

help them

> through the " woe is me " times. And if we don't understand anything

else, we

> MUST understand and BELIEVE that there is ALWAYS, ALWAYS HOPE and ALWAYS

> ANSWERS to every health concern. Prayer is a MUST.

>

>

>

> I question the juice fasting for the very ill. Sometimes this is

exactly

> what is needed because it is all they can handle, but often a bit

more solid

> food or a good whey protein is needed for strength and repair.

Detoxifying a

> very ill person is difficult, at best and it must be taken very

slowly. I

> do not believe that juicing fruit by itself is best for those with

cancer.

> Even Dr. B suggested putting ground flaxseeds in fruit juice. I

believe that

> we should eat fruits (synergistic effect and helps reduce insulin

spike) and

> juice and eat vegetables (steamed or raw). My diet, while healing, was

> between 90-95% raw. I was allowed an organic baked potato (red),

organic

> sweet potato, organic oatmeal or organic brown rice for lunch along

with my

> raw vegetables, if I wanted it. The diet that I recommend now is a

> combination of the BP and what I did.

>

> Dr. Schulze focuses a lot on cleansing and detoxification and I totally

> agree. In my opinion, if this is not done FIRST and repeated

several times

> (many docs advocate only one cleanse, but it takes many more than one to

> cleanse a toxic and sick body), then the chances of healing

completely are

> greatly impaired. Putting healthy food, good supplements, good

water, etc.

> into a toxic digestive tract and body does not make sense. I

believe this

> is one of the reasons that some protocols do not get the success

that they

> claim. Another reason is because the protoco doesn't work

synergistically.

>

> So, in a nut-shell, I think Dr. Schulze has a good protocol even

though it

> employs some things that may not be necessary for every individual.

> Everyone is so different and this must be taken into account when using

> cancer protocols -- our body, emotions, environment are not a

one-size-fits

> all.

>

> Be Well

> Loretta

 

>

>

>

> The tomatoes were good. I even saved one for your reply - but I

think I will

> have eat it now instead.

>

>

>

> BTW, what do you think of Schulze's Incurables Program?

>

>

>

> Smiles,

>

>

>

> >

[Guest guest]

Tony:

Short up date to your comments on Dr. Semoncini.

 

He is lecturing on the west coast this week

 

There is a 84 years old lung cancer patient getting IV's when I get mine. In two months his tumor has shrunk by 50%. He has had 28 bicrb IV's.

 

Duke

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- On Mon, 8/11/08, Tony wrote:

Tony Re: Is Tullio Simoncini and his shady background legitimate to begin with?oleander soup Date: Monday, August 11, 2008, 7:34 AM

 

 

Actually, I rather like your post. You are right, Simoncini has givenpeople a lot to think about. I agree that fungus is often presentalong with cancers, but disagree that cancer is a fungus itself orthat fungus is a universal cause of cancer.I surely would not want to be someone who criticized and helpedsuppress the next Gerson, Hoxsey or Rife but I do not trust Simonciniand view him much more as a promoter than a breakthrough innovator. Plus, it is a matter of record that his treatments have killedpatients by inducing extreme alkalosis. His background and educationare hidden, his patient success records largely missing and his fewtestimonials questionable.And if you scroll back a bit you will find a post from one of our ownmembers about his experience when he went to see Simoncini.He is not a doctor I would see if I had cancer, nor is the intravenousadministration of baking soda a

treatment I would choose.Yes, there is probably a very high percentage of the population whosuffers overgrowth, the same neglected health conditions that lead tothe overgrowth of fungus are also ones that lead to cancer andovergrowth itself suppresses the immune system. They should all takecolloidal silver and coconut oil and clean up their diet and lifestyle.Sorry, no tomatoes today - I intend to eat the ones I have forbreakfast along with some cantaloupe slices, a couple of eggs, gritsand whole grain toast with jam or honey and a big glass of orangejuice with pulp. Yumm!Tonyoleander soup, "Dr. Loretta Lanphier"<drlanphier@ ...> wrote:>> I have never seen a cancer patient that did not have candida/fungus> over-growth. In fact, if the truth is known, there is

most probablya very> high percentage of the population that suffers from over-growth.> > > > The requirements that you have mentioned - many very good alternative> practitioners have been accused of the same thing. Being mentioned in> PubMed is probably not a requirement for a good doctor orresearcher. :-)> Also, I have seen many MD sponsored websites that don't give their> educational information.> > > > "Reports" are almost never the whole truth. And when a method orprotocol> can be dis-credited by the doctor's past -- then it will be spreadhoping> people will believe that a questionable past affects present or future> believeability. I have never stopped to ask an emergency room doctorabout> his past even though he/she may be making some very importantdecisions for> me. I believe that these are tactics

of conventional medicine,especially> if the treatment proposed is natural and not financially lucrative. If a> doctor's past failures indicates his future, then all medicine(including> natural medicine) is most likely in trouble. ;o) No one's pastequals their> future and many, many, many doctors have been guilty of not using good> judgement, thus loosing patients. Happens all the time with cancertreatment> and no one says a thing. And certainly every incident can be madeto sound> "very dramatic" by whomever is doing the reporting. We all knowthat the> legal system is no friend to any doctor that dares to step out of the> conventional medicine box. Politics In Healing by Dan Haley givesexcellent> examples of this. In fact, docs that get the most heat or havethose "shady> backgrounds" many times the ones that are out in the field trulylooking

for> answers and thus are willing to take chances on their reputation IFit means> people might get well. Dr. Burzynski, here in Houston, was made outto be a> "shady" doc by using "urine therapy" for cancer patients. Wewatched the> "drama" unfold and at that time were appalled that this doctor couldeven> think of such a thing. However, when I was diagnosed with cancer,who did> we look at first for natural treatment? Dr. B. because after study and> research we quickly realized that if he was in trouble with thepowers that> be, he was probably doing something right. We found out quicklythat his> financial requirements ($750 for a 30-40 minute initial visit plus> $15,000.00 down in case our insurance wouldn't pay) were veryprohibitive> for us. I'm glad we ended up chosing another route. > > We are fortunate that we still have the

freedom to choose whomeverwe think> can help us and we must protect that freedom because we may not haveit for> long. Most people believed that I had lost my mind when I decidedto go to> a chiropractor for cancer treatment, especially since MD Andersonwas right> down the road. I saw what MD Anderson had to offer and experienceda month> of their recommended treatment. I truly believe that had Icompleted the> six months of the recommended chemo cocktail, I would not be here today.> Want to hear something funny? I didn't even realize that my alternative> medicine doctor was a chiropracter until I received my firstadjustment. You> see, credentials were not at the top of my Important List, because I had> already experienced what the "credentialed" doctors had to offer. Iwanted> someone with answers, not credentials and fifteen letters aftertheir

name.> By the way, do you know that many conventional medicine doctors get all> those impressive letters added by paying for them or attending a weekend> seminar? If CODEX is ever implemented in the US, I predict that allMD's> will magically become DN's (doctors of nutrition) - overnight. > > Fungus is pleomorphic (according to Dr. Rife), meaning that it has the> ability to change back and forth. And it can adapt very easily to> environment, so measuring and treating it effectively becomessomewhat of a> challenge. It seems that Dr. Simoncini has given much to thinkabout. Dr.> Simoncini has brought forth to the public and medical community somevery> important possibilities. Information that many docs (conventional & > natural) have known about, but couldn't prove. Information that weprobably> need to heed. We must keep an open-mind about

cancer-treatment thatdoes not> harm the body. I don't know if Dr. Simoncini's protocol willprovide useful> or not, perhaps it will lay an important foundation for moreresearch. I am> going to give it the benefit of the doubt, for now, because I havealways> believed that there could be a fungal and/or viral component tocancer.and I> still do.> > Most every useful natural medicine treatment was once thought to bequackery> because it was soon found out that it didn't get results everysingle time.> In other words, it didn't perform "as advertised" or "as thought"that it> would. As I have said before, I highly doubt that there will ever be a> works-all-the- time-on-everybod y cure for cancer. There are too manyfactors> that come into play. The emotional aspect of cancer is HUGE. Conventional> medicine has done a great job in

making people believe that no oneis ever> cured of cancer. Thus they have taken away HOPE and BELIEF. Two of the> most needed ingrediients to be healed. I call this "emotional rape" and> believe that every oncologist or Dr. that pronounces a death sentence or> indicates that there is no-hope should be sued and have theirlicense taken> away. > > I believe it is more about the terrain of the body more thananything else.> If the terrain (body, mind and spirit) is unfavorable for cancer toexist> then it cannot take hold. But the standard American toxiclifestyle, toxic> environment, toxic emotions, etc. unfortunately provides an excellent> terrain for dis-ease. We must promote prevention and educate peoplethat> conventional medicine is not the safety-net that they think it will be> should they become dis-eased. For those that get a

cancerdiagnosis, the> education process needs to be about changing the terrain of thewhole body.> It's not easy, but it is very doable and it can work. It worked forme and> I have seen it work for others.> > I suspect this post will not be nominated for "post of the year". ;o) Will> dodge tomatoes tomorrow. :-)> > Have a great week, everyone! > > > > Be Well> Loretta> > > > > > > > > > > That is an excellent observation, Marc.> > > > I think another question is - what about Simoncini's shady background?> While thousands are now embracing the latest cancer fad and jumpingblindly> on the bandwagon, no one is looking at what may be lying in> > the shadows behind the spotlight Simoncini basks

in.> > > > Are we really to believe that an obscure doctor from Italy with nary a> mention in PubMed in over 20 years of claimed practice has discovered a> breakthrough for cancer? Does anyone wonder how that Simoncini's own> > website fails to mention his educational background - or note thatItaly is> famous for medical degrees that are obtained in exchange for cash?> > > > How about the convictions for fraud and manslaughter that caused himto flee> Italy when a patient died as a direct result of his treatment andnot from> cancer? Or the three other reported deaths caused by his> > treatments?> > > > No one seems to be reporting on the Danish clinic where Simoncini was> reported to have been called in and no one improved but one patient died> from his treatment. Or where all the

patient records are of all> > his alleged successes. Of the few testimonials, at least two have had> serious doubts about whether the patient ever had cancer in thefirst place> and whether there was financial considerations exchanged for the> > testimonies (one was reported to have been Simoncini's mistress at one> time).> > > > There may be some validity to Simoncini's work - fungus is presentSOME of> the time when cancer is present and increasing oxygen to thecellular level> is effective for both fungus and cancer. But I am afraid thatpeople may be> rushing blindly into something that is neither as safe nor aseffective as> advertised.> > > > Tony>