Anaximperator blog

Blogging against alternative cancer treatments

Tullio Simoncini Cures Woman of Bladder Cancer by e-mail


Tullio Simoncini is an ex-medical doctor who was convicted for fraud and involuntary manslaughter. Simoncini claims that cancer is no more than an infection of the fungus candida albicans and that it can easily be cured with sodium bicarbonate (baking soda).

Lorna, a young woman who was diagnosed with bladder cancer, claims to have been cured of this disease by Tullio Simoncini. She never met Simoncini – he just sent her instructions through e-mail, after which she was able to administer the treatments herself. And Simoncini did not even charge her one penny for this life saving treatment! Now, how wonderful is that? 

Lorna tells us she was advised to undergo immuno therapy to cure her cancer, but that she decided against conventional treatment. She had heard of Simoncini through the internet, sent him an e-mail and there you are!

Here is the video of Lorna telling her story.

But Lorna did not forgo conventional treatment at all. In fact, she had undergone one of the most common and effective forms of conventional treatment there for bladder cancer, called TURBT (Trans Uretral Resection Bladder Tumor). The treatment is mentioned in the document shown in the video. After the treatment, she did not have any lesions and she did not need any further treatment. This is also stated in the document, but you have to know about it to be able to spot it.

This video was used as demonstration in many Italian sites of the effectiveness of sodium bicarbonate as a treatment for cancer.  However, the forum that first showed the video was visited by a doctor who spotted the treatment and pointed this out on the forum. It will probably come as no surprise that the doctor was banned from the forum at once…

See also: Simoncini’s miracle cure in CAT-scans.

14 responses to “Tullio Simoncini Cures Woman of Bladder Cancer by e-mail

  1. Rich April 13, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    I would have to agree that there is no medical miracle here, if the lady got a turbt.

    It’s also a positive to see that the conventional treatment was followed and not discouraged. Of course, it’s also always nice to see positive results.

    My thoughts on Simonici is he is too simplistic and seems to make alot of mistakes. If dopey’s like me with no medical training can have more information/knowledge on Candida than him, then there’s a problem.

  2. beatis April 13, 2009 at 1:14 pm

    I wouldn’t consider myself a dopey if I were you Rich! 🙂
    But we do have a problem. There are many people who know next to nothing about cancer and/or are afraid to be educated on it. These are just the people who fall for stories like Simoncini’s. And more than often, they pay for it with their lives.

  3. jli April 13, 2009 at 7:09 pm

    This is another good example of what can be wrong with testimonials as evidence of cure. And again Simoncini being a (former) doctor cannot have been unaware of this.

  4. LMO July 28, 2009 at 10:15 am

    If the TURBT works to cure cancer, why would the Urologist recommend having Immunotherapy?

  5. beatis July 28, 2009 at 7:07 pm

    @ LMO; 2009/07/28 at 10:15am

    If the TURBT works to cure cancer, why would the Urologist recommend having Immunotherapy?

    I have no idea what you mean.

  6. jli July 30, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    I have no idea what you mean.

    Immunotheapy of bladder neoplasia consists of instillation of “BCG” (Weakened tuberculosis bacteria), which induces an immunologic response, creating an environment that destroy cancer precursors. It is used after TURB if the bladder mucosa is lined with cells that if left unattended can develop into cancer. In short – TURB removes the cancer, and immunotherapy prevents recurrence.

  7. beatis July 30, 2009 at 7:43 pm

    Thank you!

  8. meme January 13, 2011 at 11:09 pm

    you guys do come across a bit smug and padlocked…even if you are right in this instance

  9. mcclarsen January 29, 2011 at 3:47 am

    I have bladder cancer and I have undergone a TURBT, however 60% + people who have a TURBT have to do it again eventually as bladder cancer has a nasty habit of reoccurring. TURBT removes the cancer, it does not cure it.

  10. CR Rains May 30, 2011 at 5:37 am

    Cancer is systemic, it just gets a stronger foothold when the milieu is weakened. To say “we got it all”(surgically) or “we destroyed the cancer” (with radiation) when they have only treated that part of the body where the cancer manifested itself is quackery. Butcher, burn and poison has few advances in the last 60 years but has improved its statistics through earlier diagnosis…which starts the timer on their 5 years alive = cured BS.

  11. beatis May 30, 2011 at 6:39 am

    Butcher, burn and poison

    First of all: I think the way you express yourself is disgusting.

    But what’s even worse: it shows you don’t know the facts.

    Cancer is systemic, it just gets a stronger foothold when the milieu is weakened.

    The question is: what are the genetic steps to convert a normal cell into a cancer cell? Or: what causes which “milieu” (= which genes) to weaken (= mutate) and exactly how does this happen: which mutations occur in which genes; what are the functions of these mutations; what are the iterations that occur; when and how do cancer cells acquire additional mutations; what are the pathways in cancer cells resulting in cells even better adapted to growth and survival? This knowledge – which is by no means complete yet – has already led to a number of new cancer treatments called targeted therapies, that have brought about a substantial decline in mortality rates for a number of cancers.

    As for butchery surgery: when cancer has not metastasized, surgery can bring about a complete cure.

    Earlier detection (mammograms), together with adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy as well as targeted therapies like aromatose inhibitors and Herceptin) have brought about a decline in mortality rates for breast cancer of about 30%.

    The same goes for many other kinds of cancers that have shown a substantial decline in mortality rates thanks to modern science. For example CML, a rare form of leukemia that was always fatal. Thanks to Gleevec, which is also a form of targeted therapy, the number of patients presently alive with CML has dramatically increased right from the start of the first trials in the early 90s. Nowadays patients with CML may expect to survive for at least 30 years after their diagnosis, if not longer.

    And these are just a few examples.

    Now what is there to look down upon? Would you really rather have all these people die, only to be able to prove you twisted point that conventional cancer therapies are quackery?

  12. jli May 31, 2011 at 5:17 pm

    …..but has improved its statistics through earlier diagnosis…which starts the timer on their 5 years alive = cured BS.

    In addition to what Beatis already has explained, you should also take a look at the development in survival rates for childhood cancers. Children are not part in screening programs, so what you see is not just a consequence of earlier detection.

  13. beatis May 31, 2011 at 5:59 pm

    Thanks jli. 🙂

  14. jli June 1, 2011 at 1:47 pm

    You are welcome Beatis 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: