Dr. Simoncini writes...

Critical Considerations

Critical considerations

Having explained the theory and having briefly illustrated the cases, 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 tumoral 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 neuro-psychical 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 premise of man's "well-being"; that is, we must be a stimulated to a critical evaluation of our contemporary oncological therapies which indubitably can guarantee suffering.

One thing is certain: nowadays it is no longer legitimate (for we are the prey of panic and of the "tumoral syndrome"), to tolerate the slaughtering of patients in the name of a "compassionate" obligation to help and be helped, without the support of solid etiological foundations.
If, for a moment, we take a different point of view and try to look at the world of the tumour with new eyes, that is, by hypothesising a simpler genesis of neoplastic proliferation, even the fungal one, we may be appalled and frightened by the ignorant hand of official medicine - a hand that is armed, however, with great cynicism and profound superficiality.
One could argue that the failures represent the inevitable price to pay to save people's lives. But when the suffering and the "authorised deaths" overwhelm the patient recoveries (that seem, indeed, to be random or due to factors not related to the therapies performed), then it is no longer acceptable to operate at all costs and regardless of the consequences, for in doing so, we are destined only to hurt people.

One can rebut that the recoveries obtained by using present oncological protocols are not so few, and that in certain types of tumour recoveries are a high percentage. It is easy to see, however, that these results are nothing but the outcome of propaganda sustained by surreptitious argumentation shedding false light on the subject of tumoral nosological entities.
When we group together both malignant tumours that are occasionally or never healed (such as lung and stomach), 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.

If, for example, out of a certain number of tumour species only one is susceptible to regression, it is not legitimate to create a nosologic diagram reporting on the global incidence of applied therapeutics regardless of the total neoplasm's. In fact, it would be more appropriate to report the uselessness, even the harmfulness of doing so, and leave an open field for alternative hypotheses as far as the demonstration of positive behaviour by the heteroplasm is concerned.
If, for example, we go back for a moment to infantile leukaemia, the frequent positive outcomes can be correlated with elements that are extraneous to the therapies administered. For example, they can be correlated with those common supportive therapies, which are considered particularly effective in young organisms. They can be correlated with the ability of the connective tissue to acquire, in a particular stage of growth and development, that maturity which is necessary to the strengthening of an immunological activity that is, at a certain point in life, intrinsically insufficient.

It is in fact frequent in medicine that some diseases disappear spontaneously, without apparent reason, but in correlation with certain transitions of organic maturation.
On the oncological-mycological issue, it is known how psoriasis and some chronic and recurrent mycoses of infancy that reject any treatment suddenly, at a certain stage of the body's development, disappear completely without a trace.
From the examples noted, which could be uselessly multiplied ad infinitum, it is evident that the full panorama of tumoral disease is extremely varied and complex. It follows that, taking postures that are exclusive or preclusive, whether they are conventional or unconventional, may indicate a lack of vision. This is especially so since the terrain we are exploring is largely unknown, and therefore cannot be charted in a way that is uniform or standardised.
Wherever we consider an environment occupied by invisible ultra-microscopic elements, and since the structure of knowledge must inevitably rest on the construction of a multiplicity of theoretical entities, there is a risk of slipping from a perception that reflects reality to one that is merely fictional. The acceptance of such a fictional construct may become a pernicious reality.
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, though 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 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, etiological, pathogenical, clinical and therapeutical research in line with a renewed microbiology and mycology that would probably drive to the conclusion already illustrated; that is, the tumour is a fungus - the 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 II, etc.).

In closing, if the world of fungi - those most complex and aggressive micro-organisms - has until now too often been bypassed and left unobserved, the hope of this work is that we will quickly become aware of the hazards of these micro-organisms so that medical resources can be channelled not up blind alleys but toward the real enemies of the human organism: external infectious agents.

Additional information

  • About Dr. Simoncini
    Dr. Tullio Simoncini discovered that the cause of cancer is a fungus and tries hard to persuade scientists how wrong are the actual theories on cancer. His therapy based on the strongest antifungal substance, sodium bicarbonate, is harmless and very effective and should be adopted all over the world.
    simoncini cancer therapy
  • Summary of the therapy
    For about 100 years, the fundamental theory behind cancer has been based on the hypothesis that it is a malfunctioning of the genes. This point of view implies that cancer is intracellular. My point of view however is that cancer is a fungal infection, and therefore an extra cellular phenomenon.
    simoncini cancer therapy
  • The treatment with sodium bicarbonate
    My methods have cured people for over 25 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.
    sodium bicarbonate
  • Treatment protocols
    Please notice that cancer treatments using drops, whashes or drinking the control of a doctor is indicated. This is also the case when it concerns psoriasis or most skin cancers. For other types of cancer (of internal organs) the involvement of a doctor is always neccessary.

Contact Dr. Simoncini

Please provide as much info as possible in your message.

telephone: (+39) 335294480
email: t.simoncini@alice.it

Support us!

There is a long way to go.
You can help by putting a link on your Twitter, Facebook or Instagram account, or mention this site on your blog.


Some of my patients put their story on Youtube to show the world they survived. This channel is provided to you by SeoLeo, since 2007 my partner in online media.


United-States   Slovenia   Netherlands   Italy   China and Taiwan   Brazil   Hungary   France   Spain  

© 2022 Tullio Simoncini MD | SeoLeo

The information we provide is for educational purposes only and is not intended as medical advice. Users assume all responsibility for the application of the content on themselves. The information and/or products which on this website are reproduced are not meant to replace and/or to ignore the advice of a practicing physician.

We make use of cookies on this website. Read more about it on this page.