Anaximperator blog

Blogging against alternative cancer treatments

Cancer, Fungus and Sodium Bicarbonate: Tullio Simoncini and How Not To Cure Skin Cancer

Atomic structure of iodineTullio Simoncini, a convicted ex medical doctor, ‘discovered’ that cancer is no more than the fungus candida albicans, and that it can be cured successfully with sodium bicarbonate. Skin cancer is also made of candida albicans, but can only be cured by local application of Iodine – not sodium bicarbonate, like all other cancers. Says Tullio Simoncini.

By the way, there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that cancer is caused by candida albicans or that it can be cured with sodium bicarbonate – or with iodine for that matter.

On his website Simoncini publishes ‘evidence’ of his miracle cures. Most of these stories lack all essential medical information and are therefore virtually meaningless. However, in some cases a minimum of information is given, making it possible to find out what really happened. Invariably, heavy manipulation of data is shown, as in this case of a gentleman from Australia who suffered from skin cancer on his scalp.

This gentleman found himself having to travel all the way to Rome, in order to be healed by Tullio Simocini, because, as we are told in the video, his Australian doctors failed miserably to help him. The video is here. The case was analyzed for us by our Italian friend WeWee, who is himself an MD.

The gentleman tells us that he he had skin cancer, which was confirmed by a histological examination, and that his conventional treatment consisted of surgery and a number of treatments with ‘liquid nitrogen’. In the video it says that Simoncini’s treatment resulted in the cancer to finally disappear, something his Australian doctors could not bring about.

This patient appears to have undergone the complete standard protocol for skin cancer: surgical resection of cancer; examination of the tissue by the pathologist; follow-up procedure to reduce risk of recurrence  (liquid nitrogen), resulting in a complete clinical recovery.

Pathology report

When a resection of localized tumour (like a melanoma) is performed, it is essential that the whole area, including the tissue margins, is free of cancer cells. This is established by a histological examination, carried out by the pathologist. In the pathology report it states clearly whether resection has removed the complete tumour and whether the margins of the collected samples are free of cancer cells.

Skin cancer pathology report

In the pathology report of the Australian patient (picture above), it says that of the five lesions removed, two were basal cell carcinoma and one was melanoma in situ. The tissue margins were free of cancer cells. The other two were completely benign (skin fibromas):
1. Basal cell carcinoma: clear margins (underlined in red in the picture)
2. Basal cell carcinoma: clear margins (underlined in red in the picture)
3. Malignant melanoma in situ: narrowly clear margins (underlined in red in the picture)

The cryotherapy rounds were given for extra safety.

Only after that came Simoncini’s treatment with iodine, which is supposed to have finally cured the patient. As he does more often, Simoncini uses the report of the patient’s successful conventional therapy to ‘prove’ the efficacy of his own sodium bicarbonate treatment.

But how can you cure someone who has already been cured…?

43 responses to “Cancer, Fungus and Sodium Bicarbonate: Tullio Simoncini and How Not To Cure Skin Cancer

  1. jli July 22, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    This post actually demonstrates two of the problems that are regularly encountered in alternative cancer treatment testimonials. We have the one where the altie gets credit for something achieved by conventional treatment – the cure. In addition we have the treatment of something that is not really a cancer. Melanoma in situ is the immediate precursor of a malignant melanoma – not a fully developed melanoma.

  2. Bram Hengeveld July 23, 2009 at 6:55 pm

    The question that keeps ringing in my head: how can ‘we’ get the message across? Although I’m very fond of this and other blogs, I wonder whether blogs in general are succesfull at ‘getting the message across’. (although I hope I’m wrong and ofcourse getting to know others is a good thing). I’m under the impression that, when people are choosing alties, or considering it an option it’s already ‘too late’. Luckily this man was allready treated well…
    (anecdote: I for one have never witnessed a ‘believer fall from grace’ within a thread, but perhaps I’m alone in that)
    But where does it start?
    Is it a distrust of medicine in general? Curiosity towards ‘the (super)natural’? A general lack of scientific knowledge? A lack of knowledge about the dark side of ‘natural healing’ (I got some classmates prett shocked by telling them about Matthias Rath) A combition?
    And more important: what are the best strategies to confront it? High School? We make healthclaims based on certain kinds of research; what is the minimum the students should know about it? Personally I would’ve gladly missed some physics, chemistry or biology to be taught the basics of scientific research (not merely it’s outcomes) or basic logic.

    Will we forever bang our digital heads against the WordPresswalls and will all the woomeisters keep happily gathering bigger flocks and spreading their bogus treatments? (and sue anyone who tries to critize them)

  3. beatis July 23, 2009 at 8:08 pm

    (anecdote: I for one have never witnessed a ‘believer fall from grace’ within a thread, but perhaps I’m alone in that)

    There was one person here once, who was very impressed with Simoncini and after reading a number of posts on this blog decided that he probably wasn’t the great healer that he pretends to be.

    I don’t know what the best strategies are. All of them I suppose, and even then, you must never underestimate the powers of fear and its twin denial. But just imagine what the internet would be like if there were only woo and nothing else.

    Also, people actually posting comments on this blog are greatly outnumbered by our silent visitors. We might very well have convinced a few of them – they just didn’t bother to tell us…🙂

  4. Bram Hengeveld July 23, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    Let’s hope so!

    Your’s is a noble cause😀

  5. jli July 24, 2009 at 6:14 pm

    I believe too that the messages of this blog and sites alike are reaching people who need it. An indication I see is, that a large proportion of the traffic to my site goes to the “Big pharma” section. The role of big pharma is one that alties use intensively to promote their ideas.
    If one googles anything that is related to Simoncini this blog is often (usually) displayed on the first page giving patients/relatives a chance to come across some balanced information. I also think that this blog meets seeking people with respect and understanding. Even if they enter the blog with rants against conventional treatment and all that. That´s a good strategy, which I hope I can continue to contribute to. Occasional full blown altie visits to the blog is also a sign, that they feel somewhat threatened.

  6. mike from ny July 27, 2009 at 8:50 pm

    Simoncini got busted for not curing a Woman with His Methods….How about the American Doc who killed My sister , My 42 year old Brother inlaw …forget it the list of the uncured in My Family would fill this website….

  7. beatis July 28, 2009 at 4:44 am

    Simoncini got busted for not curing a Woman with His Methods

    No he didn’t. He got ‘busted’ for selling completely bogus treatments, making people believe they could be cured with it and they wouldn’t need standard treatment.

    With standard cancer treatment, nowadays close to 60% of patients survive their illness more than 10 years after diagnosis. I agree with you that this is not enough. But it is a hell of a lot more than Simoncini’s 0%. Also, Simoncini makes people believe they do not need standard treatment and this leads to potentially curable cancers becoming incurable.

    I am truly sorry you have lost so many loved ones to cancer, it must be very scary and you have my sincere sympathy.

  8. LMO July 28, 2009 at 10:59 am

    who on earth would write this article. It must be someone who has never had cancer. I used Dr Simoncini’s SB treatment on myself for bladder cancer. I used both conventional and Dr Simoncini’s treatment. Why the hell shouldnt I? I use the conventional doctors to get a check up every 4 months. I pay for this, by the way, its not cheap. But I didnt pay Simoncini a cent. So why the hell would he lose his job, title, status to promote this.

  9. Jaro Belicka September 13, 2009 at 7:36 am

    beatis, I was just wondering if you are on pharmaceutical pay roll for the good work you are doing?
    How could you say that Simoncini has cured 0% which you know is not true. There are so many testimonies of his patients who will say that it is Dr. Simoncini’s treatment which has cured them. Are all of those people lying?
    I can not see the reason why would somebody be so much against alternative medicine like you are unless of course one is a part of pharmaceutical conglomerates who are ruling the world, just about.

  10. beatis September 13, 2009 at 9:27 am

    How could you say that Simoncini has cured 0% which you know is not true.

    Why do you say I know it is not true?

    Firstly: I don’t know anyone who has been cured by Simoncini.

    Secondly: we’ve spent weeks reading and watching many testimonials of patients of Simoncini, and they have the same problem that all testimonials have: complete medical information is never given and they can never be substantiated, so we never know what really happened. To a lay person they may sound convincing but a medical professional can point out the faults right away.

    Thirdly: It is proven without any doubt that cancer is not the fungus candida albicans. This has been studied and demonstrated many times. Also, there is not a shred of doubt that sodium bicarbonate cannot not cure any systemic fungus infections and cannot not cure cancer.

    I don’t think all of Simoncini’s patients are lying, although I know for a fact that a number of them have been lying – and still are – because of their hatred against all authorities or what they view as such, including conventional medicine and science.

    I think most people in these testimonials are sincere though. Many people, including cancer patients themselves, often don’t know very much about cancer and attribute their cure to the alternative therapy instead of their conventional treatment.

    Often, are so afraid of conventional treatments that they simply will not take in the truth. These are the people that Simoncini preys on.

    While I was still on treatment, I met a woman who had to undergo a mastectomy and chemotherapy, just like me. She was terribly afraid and had contacted Simoncini, who had told her these treatments not only weren’t necessary, but would cause her cancer to metastasize. I explained to her why it was vital that she be treated and so did her doctor, the Nurse Practitioner, her husband and her children. I showed her videos, photographs, told her chemo was not the end of the world, asked her to look at the other women at the ward, who all got through it fine and were definitely not sick and miserable all the time. I told her the operation wasn’t half as bad as it seems. But she wouldn’t listen. Simoncini had told her the whole cancer explanation was nothing but a big fabrication of the pharmaceutical industry to push their deadly drugs and that doctors were in on this deceit for the profits. And she believed it: her fear made her believe it.

    It wasn’t until her husband told her he would leave her if she wouldn’t let herself be treated conventionally that she changed her mind.

    I can not see the reason why would somebody be so much against alternative medicine like you are unless of course one is a part of pharmaceutical conglomerates who are ruling the world

    In the About page you can read why we are against alternative cancer treatments, meaning cancer treatments that are used instead of conventional treatments.

    Alternative cancer treatments are sure to kill. That’s why I am so against them. When alternative practitioners tell their patients that they should turn away from conventional medicine, they rob them of their only chance for survival and lead them into a path of extreme suffering that might very well have been avoided.

    You can find a lot of information about cancer survival rates in Europe with standard cancer treatments: http://www.eurocare.it/Results/tabid/79/Default.aspx#surv9599

    And no, conventional medicine cannot cure all cancer patients: it cannot cure metastasized cancer – with a few exceptions, like for example Lance Armstrong. But alternative medicine cannot even cure stage I cancer. Currently, the 10-year survival rate of stage I breast cancer with conventional therapy is close to 90%.

    But also with stage IV cancers progress is being made all the time; people continue to live longer with conventional treatments and with a better quality of life.

    Regarding your “pharma shill gambit:” none of us on this blog have ever accused proponents of alternative medicine of saying what they say because they were being paid by the supplement industry to do so. You can be right or wrong no matter where you work.

    What in fact you are saying is that you’re not going to believe anything I say, you’re not even going to read it, or check it, or take it into account in any way, because you have agreed with yourself that I am being paid by big pharma. To all intents and purposes, you are calling me a liar and I do take exception to that.

    If you are not prepared to try and be a bit unbiased and react to what we have to say, rather than to what you think we represent, then any further discussion is pointless.

  11. Jaro September 13, 2009 at 12:09 pm

    beatis, I am not judging you. All I am doing is questioning and trying to find the best way for treatment of cancer. I would rather take natural way but would not mind to look at the other side too. Do you know “Halleluiah acres ministries”? The founder had a prostate cancer so many years ago and survived with natural healthy-living food diet.
    My father and many people I knew have taken orthodox treatments like surgery and chemo and they are all dead.
    also would like to ask you about the reason why Dr.Simoncini was struck out off. You seams to be in disagreement with this statement. Why?
    “The only reason why Dr. Simoncini has been struck off from the medical order is because he as an oncologist administrated Sodium Bicarbonate instead of the conventional chemo in the treatment of cancer patients. His lawyers have started a rehabilitation court trial at the international Court of Justice in Strassburg”

  12. beatis September 13, 2009 at 12:31 pm

    beatis, I am not judging you.

    I’m glad, thank you.

    It is not uncommon for people with prostate cancer to survive for many years without any treatment. Prostate cancer often grows very slowly:

    Prostate cancer tends to develop in men over the age of fifty and although it is one of the most prevalent types of cancer in men, many never have symptoms, undergo no therapy, and eventually die of other causes. This is because cancer of the prostate is, in most cases, slow-growing, symptom free and men with the condition often die of causes unrelated to the prostate cancer, such as heart/circulatory disease, pneumonia, other unconnected cancers, or old age.

    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer

    Simoncini was convicted of fraud and criminal negligence:
    1. Because he charged patients money for a treatment that was known to be ineffective. This constituted fraud.
    2. Because a patient of his died in an operation during which sodium bicarbonate was administered. The operation was carried out so clumsily that the patient’s gut was ruptured. The after care was so careless that the patient died. This constituted criminal negligence.
    Because of this, he was convicted to 4 years in prison and struck off the medical register. In the same year there was a general amnesty in Italy, implying that, although convictions remained in effect, prison sentences up to 4 years did not have to be served. So Simoncini did not have to go to prison, although his conviction still stands.

    Although he claims his lawyers have started a rehabilitation procedure at the international court, there is no information that can confirm this.

  13. jennyj0 September 13, 2009 at 12:50 pm

    I am very sorry that you have had to see so many people die of cancer. That is a very hard thing having to deal with.

    However, the fact remains that alternative therapy has a lousy track record when it comes to curing cancer.

    You could try and combine conventional therapy with complementary treatments. They can help you feel better, because they can ease symptoms and can give you a sense of control and peace of mind that can be very helpful and beneficial.

  14. Jaro September 13, 2009 at 7:14 pm

    Maybe you should then watch this about the record of people who cured themselves by simple and natural ways instead of going through orthodox medical surgery, chemo and radiation. Rev. George is best example who would finished most likely same as him mother if he taken the chance. He chosen the better way and is still alive and well 33 years after he was diagnosed with colon cancer. Beatis edit: deleted (no advertising)

  15. beatis September 13, 2009 at 7:37 pm

    I found this on the internet:

    Whether Malkmus actually had cancer is not clear. In local newspaper report that was published in 1998, Malkmus admitted that he never consulted a cancer specialist for diagnosis but had relied on nutritionists and chiropractors. “We never had any biopsies to prove this,” he said, “We don’t know it was malignant.

    See: http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/malkmus.html

    Hallelujah acres ministries is a company selling food supplements and other dietary products. This is the second time you bring up this company. This blog is not for advertising dubious commercial health products or for promoting other blogs or websites that do (see: Regarding Comments). I get the feeling you have been taking me for a ride and only want to use this blog to spread this hallelujah nonsense.

  16. Jaro September 14, 2009 at 9:18 am

    Those who need help will search for it. No matter how much some elements try to hide it. Go with prayer and God. Go natural way before you will chose drug poisons which will slowly and surely kill you.

  17. beatis September 14, 2009 at 10:23 am

    No matter how much some elements try to hide it.

    There is nothing to hide. What isn’t there, can’t be hidden.The ‘natural way’ as you call it, never cured anyone from cancer.

    When you should advise people to go this way and their waste of time causes the cancer to spread and become incurable, this will be on your conscience.

    To persist in telling people that only the ‘natural way’ is ‘God’s way’, despite the overwhelming amount of evidence which proves this to be an extremely dangerous advice, makes you not only willfully ignorant, but also cruel, narrow-minded and immensely hypocritical.

  18. wilmamazone September 14, 2009 at 11:39 am

    To persist in telling people that only the ‘natural way’ is ‘God’s way’, despite the overwhelming amount of evidence which proves this to be an extremely dangerous advice, makes you not only willfully ignorant, but also cruel, narrow-minded and immensely hypocritical.

    I agree with this.
    Jaro you don’t know anything about cancer ánd God’s way!

  19. anaximperator September 14, 2009 at 12:45 pm

    Mr Jaro,

    Your comment will not be posted.

    You were never interested in what we have to say. You are not interested in verifiable facts. You are not interested in science. All you want is to abuse this blog for spreading your false promises of cancer cure with ‘God’s diet’ and insulting people. We won’t allow that here. You can use your own blog for that.

  20. cryptocheilus September 14, 2009 at 8:15 pm

    @ anax

    What took you so long?

    Oh, eh Jaro.

    Close the door on your way out please; I’m trying to listen to the sweet music above and I don’t want to disturb the neighbours.

    Here’s two for on the road….

  21. Jaro September 15, 2009 at 10:10 am

    Did you know this?”””Place cancer cells in a cooked media and they will proliferate. Now place the cancer cells in a raw matter and they will disappear! This astounding fact is known to the Cancer society, but the public was never informed.””””””””

  22. beatis September 16, 2009 at 5:41 pm

    After long deliberation we have decided to allow Jaro’s comment of 2009/09/15 at 10:10am after all, because of his claim that cancer cells will grow in cooked matter and disappear in raw matter.

    We were very fascinated by phenomenon this and decided to present it to our blog pathologist jli. This is what he said:

    This is so far out. I would like to ask Mr Jaro how come cancer cells grow in uncooked humans (and animals).

  23. jli September 16, 2009 at 5:41 pm

    Place cancer cells in a cooked media and they will proliferate

    To the above one might add that the idea is particularly bizarre, when analyzing animals living in nature, as they are unable to cook their food. They are forced to live on raw food only. And they get cancer as well.

  24. charles allan November 21, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    Sodium bicarbonate would alkalise the body
    and cancer needs an acid environment. So lots
    of Potassium calcium magnesium and sodium
    can alkalise the body and help the body to kill the cancer cells – especially if the body is in an acid condition. It is possible that melanoma and some cancers are caused by fungus. So sodium bicarbonate could help – eg by killing the fungus and raising the PH to kill cancer cells.

  25. jennyj0 November 21, 2009 at 2:46 pm

    There is no evidence for both theories. It’s been explained here extensively. Can’t you read?

    Apart from that, it’s also very dangerous to alter the standard pH of your body. Which has also been explained here. *sigh*

  26. jli November 21, 2009 at 5:01 pm

    …. if the body is in an acid condition.

    The body is never normally in an acid condition. The body funtions properly in a very narrow pH range (7,35-7,45) which is slightly alkaline. The body has several mechanisms that help maintain this normal pH range. How this works is explained in an easily understandable way at http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec12/ch159/ch159a.html. It is also explained what happens if those mechanisms fail to maintain the normal pH range (alkalosis/acidosis respectively).

  27. charles allan January 12, 2010 at 8:36 pm

    You are wrong the body can become acid in order to balance blood PH. Acidosis is a well known condition. Besides Sodium Bicarbonate
    is mixed with conventional chemo to stop it killing the patient. Why does Pharma not do trials on sodium bicarbonate and chemo separately ??????? Without expensive patents the drug companies would die – so we must look at “who benefits” Cancer cure rates have remained steady at about 3% with conventional
    chemo . Without any treatment most patients would live for the 5 years anyway so it is orthodox treatment that is lacking in evidence.
    Mark Sircus explains the acid – alkali theory in his book.

  28. charles allan January 12, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    Just because you keep saying over and over there is no evidence does not mean there is no evidence – it just means you refuse to look at any evidence. The western diet can produce an acid body state which can lead to degenerative
    disease like cancer. If you are denying this is not
    happening you are blind to the evidence.

  29. charles allan January 12, 2010 at 8:54 pm

    Referring to the comment above about Dr Simoncini typical charges for conventional therapy are about £200k – £400k and most patients die of the cancer or treatment – before or shortly after the ” 5 years” – We all know of many of our friends and family – so does this mean that the oncologists should be charged and jailed ?????
    It is amazing how many cancer doctors choose
    alternative therapy when THEY get cancer – they know the chances of their methods.

  30. beatis January 12, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    I’m afraid you have completely misunderstood the whole thing. Please read this: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001181.htm
    As you can see, cancer sometimes causes acidosis, and not the other way around.

    Your ‘cure rate’ of 3% is preposterous, where on earth did you get that number?? The average cure rate of cancer is almost 60%.

    Mirk Sircus doesn’t know what he is talking about.

  31. Nescio January 13, 2010 at 12:07 am

    Charles Allan wrote:

    “Acidosis is a well known condition.” and
    “The western diet can produce an acid body state which can lead to degenerative disease like cancer. If you are denying this is not happening you are blind to the evidence.”

    I can’t blame you for believing this as it is repeated in hundreds of places on the internet by people with impressive sounding qualifications. It sounds plausible, and seems to make sense, as long as you don’t know much about biochemistry and have no experience in measuring blood pH and dealing with real metabolic acidosis, which is indeed a well-known condition.

    I have measured arterial blood pH on many hundreds of people, and I can assure you that those with acidosis are very ill indeed. It takes more than poor diet to induce acidosis. Once you have dealt with the underlying condition causing the acidosis, such as diabetic hyperglycemia, the acidosis goes away. The human body is really quite remarkable in how well it can deal with acidity and alkalinity, and something has to go very badly wrong before it fails to rapidly normalize its pH. I don’t remember ever finding a metabolic acidosis in someone without a serious underlying problem, except perhaps in marathon runners, and that was temporary. Cancer patients are not acidotic until they are very ill indeed, with either large tumors that are secreting acids, or tumors that are interfering with vital organs.

    Sodium bicarbonate doesn’t kill human cancer cells in cultures, or in animals, at least not in concentrations lower than that in which it kills normal cells, so it is very unlikely it would do so in people. It is not unknown for people to die from an overdose of sodium bicarbonate (especially if they have low oxygen) as the body is really not very good at dealing with alkalosis, (or large amounts of sodium) as it rarely happens naturally.

    Mark Sircus is an honorary doctor of oriental medicine (his doctorate awarded by a Mexican hospital for services rendered according to his website) and an acupuncturist so it is unlikely he has had to deal with sick patients with acidosis in an emergency setting. I suspect this is true of most doctors who display an ignorance of very basic physiology and biochemistry, let alone how acid-base homeostasis works; many of them have doctorates in naturopathy or similar non-scientific subjects from unaccredited distance learning institutions.

  32. jli January 13, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    Besides Sodium Bicarbonate
    is mixed with conventional chemo to stop it killing the patient.

    So you do understand that the use of sodium bicarbonate is not suppressed by big pharma.

    And it is true that some (not all) patients who recieve chemotherapy are also treated with sodium bicarbonate.

    In order to understand why, you only have to know that destruction of tumor cells leads to formation of uric acid. The body disposes of uric acid through the kidneys and the urine. And this is where sodium bicarbonate comes into play.

    Sodium bicarbonate given correctly will not affect the pH of the whole body, but it will increase it in the kidneys and in the urine. This helps keeping uric acid dissolved, and thus easily disposed of through the urine.

    In short sodium bicarbonate is useful after the cancer cells have died. It does not increase pH of the whole body, and is not used by the oncologists to destroy cancer cells.

  33. Jaro January 13, 2010 at 8:44 pm

    I would try anything and everything before going for cut, burn and poison.

  34. beatis January 13, 2010 at 8:52 pm

    Be my guest.

  35. anaximperator January 13, 2010 at 9:11 pm

    Hm yes, Jaro, with anything and everything you mean something like this?
    http://holfordwatch.info/2010/01/09/thomas-lodi-cancer/#comment-27860
    Very helpful I’m sure, and not at all expensive.

  36. beatis January 13, 2010 at 9:20 pm

    Making people spend $20k or more (most patients wiped out their entire savings) when you are potentially weeks away from dying.

    Dr. Lodi’s staff makes you think that their treatments WILL cure you.

    Of course they would – it’s all part of the charade.

    Not only are the patients stripped of all their money, but also are their last weeks made a misery with useless fasting, juicing, detoxing and all manner of other grueling regimes.

    I am sick to my stomach with the greed, the stupidity and the self-righteous callousness that cancer patients are expected to put up with.

  37. anaximperator January 13, 2010 at 9:45 pm

    Jaro, Charles Allen, David and all other likeminded people: read this first and talk later (or not of course):
    https://anaximperator.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/does-belief-exonerate/
    And this:
    http://sram.org/0302/bias.html

    Good luck and good night.

  38. furgurl October 27, 2011 at 8:34 pm

    there is no cure for cancer,,, and this doctor is a hussler scam artist,,,, what a joke ,,, even was on the art bell show as a hussler,,,, get real

  39. furgurl October 27, 2011 at 8:36 pm

    george noorey puts on all these alternative fools who claim thiso and that for ratings ,, remember the fools that were going to mexico for apricot pit cures ,,, all died,,, scam and this is a scam ,, NO CURE for cancer,,,, doom,,, it is in the cells and your genes ,,, dooom

  40. beatis October 28, 2011 at 6:07 am

    ,, NO CURE for cancer,,,, doom,,,

    Thankfully it’s not quite that bleak: currentlly, close to 60% of all cancer patients survive their disease.

    it is in the cells and your genes ,,,

    You’re right, and in our cells and genes lie cures as well, as many cancer patients have already experienced.

  41. eugene pike February 7, 2013 at 11:37 pm

    Sodium bicarbonate really can cure cancer. For some its hard to believe. But in our experience it help alot. I gave it to my wife who was suffering from GERD ACID REFLUX. THE DOCTORS have been treating her for almost a year with omeperazol or prilosec but never worked. I notice when she had acid reflux her blood pressure goes up. I was worried because the doctor said prolonged problems such like Gerd could lead to stomach cancer.so i did some research and came across Sodium bicarbonate. But I was skeptic at first because of the sodium in the baking soda. But we tried it. Suddenly she hav the best sleep that night she took the sodium bicarbonate(baking soda). I gave her 1/8 of a teaspoon mixed in a glass of water. Drinking it as needed. Say you drink 1 glass of water with Baking soda. Wait after if it comes back drink another one.taking two swallows and stop

  42. Marc Stephens Is Insane February 10, 2013 at 7:49 am

    Eugene,

    What does GERD have to do with curing cancer?

  43. Marc Stephens Is Insane February 10, 2013 at 8:57 am

    I don’t think it’s a coincidence that baking soda’s initial are BS. There’ so much BS associated with baking soda. Maybe Big Soda is behind the lies to sell more of their product? 🙂

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: