“The doctor of the future will give no medicines, but will interest his patients in the care of the human frame, in diet and in the cause of disease.”
- Thomas Edison
Dr. Tullio Simoncini is another doctor who started with conventional training in oncology and now uses the most inexpensive treatment option for cancer. Dr. Simoncini describes in one interview how he sat in one of his oncology classes listening to his professor say, "We don't fully know or understand what cancer is, cancer is a mystery." He thought to himself, this doesn't make sense. How have we studied cancer for so long without understanding what it is? Further, Dr. Simoncini decided to find out what cancer is so that he could effectively treat his patients.
He began his internship working with children with cancer on an oncology ward in a hospital. Dr. Simoncini describes how his heart would break, seeing these children struggling and many of them dying. He desperately needed to find a cure.
When he started to work with cancer patients with skin cancer, he tried using iodine treatments on the skin. He saw astounding results. Through observing the tumors in his patients, he further questioned the color. Every tumor was white, it looked like fungus, like a mushroom. He speculated that the tumors were a fungal infection in the body. Knowing that sodium bicarbonate would eliminate fungus, Dr. Simoncini started to experiment with administering this simple substance. To his amazement, tumors started to regress with the treatment of sodium bicarbonate.
In fact, his first patient to use the sodium bicarbonate was an 11-year old who was in a coma after suffering with leukemia. His mother begged Dr. Simoncini to treat her son and to allow her one more conversation. Through a glucose and sodium bicarbonate IV, a full day later, her son came out of his coma and began speaking in full sentences to his mother.
The most incredible part about this story is the fact that oncologists have been using sodium bicarbonate for years when administering chemotherapy to their patients. The sodium bicarbonate is meant to protect the patients kidneys. Without sodium bicarbonate, modern oncology may not exist because patients would die too quickly from the acidic/toxic impact of chemotherapy agents such as mustard gas.
What is sodium bicarbonate and why is it working so well for Dr. Simoncini?
Baking soda or sodium bicarbonate is an electron donor and is produced in the stomach, pancreas, and kidneys. Sodium bicarbonate facilitates the following functions in the body:
Helps oxygen dissociate from hemoglobin
Neutralizes acid
Protects digestive enzymes
Increases blood fluids
Aids detoxification
Anti-inflammatory
Anti-fungal
Combined with iodine, can affect microbes in the blood
Increases tumor pH and inhibits spontaneous metastasis
Induces cellular alkalization through bicarbonate transport system
Regulates cellular pH through bicarbonate transport system
Regulates whole body pH through bicarbonate transport system
Regulates cell volume and fluid secretion through bicarbonate transport system
Disposes body's major metabolic waste product
Thus, sodium bicarbonate has many valuable therapeutic functions in the body and has been successfully used by Dr. Simoncini in treating a variety of cancers. In fact, he has seen well over 1,000 patients going into remission through his administration of sodium bicarbonate through IVs.
Be careful in googling Dr. Simoncini as he has not escaped persecution and slander to his name by various websites and Internet sites such as "The Quack Watch." So many amazing holistic doctors and advocates for effective alternative treatments have been chosen to be listed on the Quack Watch that it must now be a prerequisite for being so amazing and ahead of your time that normal people cannot handle your findings and truth in light of mainstream approaches to cancer. Or is big Pharma simply paying Quack Watch to "expose" highly effective holistic cancer doctors?
Also, don't be surprised if you find Dr. Simoncini accused of manslaughter for one of his patients. Because that happened too. Even though the patient in question was never a patient but simply someone he spoke to over the phone.
The plot thickens. And more and more people are being enlightened and awakened to truth and ideas/innovations that could save millions of peoples lives. Let's continue, despite the challenges, lies, and fear tactics. Someones life is counting on us and needing the truth.
When I read and learn about the story of Ric's daughter, Crystin, I feel compelled to share and expose their story.
Crystin became diagnosed with a rare brain tumor and was only 4 years old. Some of the tumor was removed through surgery, but all of it could not be removed. The type of tumor was called a malignant rhabdoid and was so rare that only 25 people had ever been diagnosed. All 25 cases had led to death within 4 months to 1 year after the diagnosis. The oncologists first recommended that Crystin be taken home to die and there was no hope for her. The only alternative was chemotherapy and radiation which, according to the oncologists, may kill her.
My question for Dr. Prados would be: when Ric asked you, "Is there anything else you know of, other than chemotherapy or radiation, that can be used for my daughter?" Why did you say a firm "no" when two of your oncology patients with brain tumors had seen Dr. Burzynski and survived years longer than you expected because of his treatments of antineoplastons? Why did you lie and not allow Ric to do research on another option of treatment?
Ric ended up suing you, Dr. Prados, for misleading his family and being part of the reason why she did not survive. Ric stated "We assumed that these people (Dr. Prados included) were oncologists and therefore they study cancer. We were wrong." Instead of knowing all options for cancer patients and being well versed in new discoveries and options for cancer patients, current treatment options are pushed: chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery. The same options that have been available for over sixty years and have not successfully eradicated the fear of death surrounding this disease. And yet, there are doctors who do not use chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery and see amazing results, including Dr. Burzynski.
Dr. Prados, why did you push chemotherapy and radiation when Ric and his family started exploring and searching for other options? Dr. Prados, why did Crystin still receive chemotherapy and radiation in high doses when no one with her type of cancer ever benefitted from this course of action?
Crystin received 6,000 rads of radiation in the course of 4 months. This is the same amount that people were exposed to if they were within one mile of the atomic bomb at Hiroshima. Why did this seem like a good idea? At the same time she was exposed to the radiation of an atomic bomb, Crystin received heavy chemotherapy. At one point, her parents had to use rubber gloves to change her diapers because she was so toxic from treatments. Crystin couldn't run, lost balance and vision, and developed the risk of swallowing food into her lungs. In the midst of all the side effects, the tumor disappeared for a period of time. The doctors did say that the tumor would come back because of the carcinogenic effect of radiation and chemotherapy.
Ric found information about Dr. Burzynski and started to talk to former patients about his treatment facility in Texas. Dr. Prados, why did you tell Ric that antineoplastons don't work and that the treatment was so toxic it could do more damage to Crystin? And why did you label Dr. Burzynski a fraud? Do you have research and proof about the outrageous claims that you made?
Ric and his family still decided to take Crystin to see Dr. Burzynski. For one year, Crystin received antineoplastons and for months, the tumor did not show up again. After stopping antineoplastons for a few weeks, the tumor came back. The family, nearly bankrupt from having to pay for treatments out of pocket and not receiving coverage from their health insurance, needed to find a way to put Crystin back on antineoplastons. Dr. Prados, why did you encourage them to go back on radiation and chemotherapy after all the damage her body suffered from previous treatments and when you had no hope in a cure?
After 3 weeks of being on antineoplastons again, the tumor shrunk 25%. Nine weeks later, the tumor was gone without the toxic side effects that Crystin experienced on chemotherapy and radiation. Why Dr. Prados would you ascribe the tumor reduction to residual radiation effects when Crystin had not been on radiation for over 1 year?
Crystin died a few months later. An autopsy confirmed that there was no cancer in Crystin's body at the time of death. Rather, Crystin died of neurological necrosis because of the overuse of radiation in her treatments.
The saddest part of the story is that Ric and his family believes that if they had started with Dr. Burzynski and antineoplastons before chemotherapy and radiation, Crystin would still be alive today. Dr. Prados, you took the Hippocratic oath to become a doctor which states that you are to "first, do no harm." In light of the death of Crystin, do you believe that you have upheld the Hippocratic oath? I don't think that Ric's family would believe so.
Here is information about a new trial that Dr. Burzynski is facing because mainstream medicine and the FDA want to strip him of his medical license because of his success and because his treatment was discovered by him and Big Pharma cannot take any of the profits.
What are antineoplastons? Antineoplastons are polypeptides discovered by Dr. Burzynski which have an anticancer or antitumor effect. Burzynski studied peptides from human blood and urine for decades and found that people with cancer had less peptides in their urine than people without cancer. Burzynski was trying to figure out the control factor for normal apoptosis in the body. Apoptosis is normal cell death. Tumors develop from cells that are out of control and the normal apoptosis function is turned off for some reason.
He introduced peptide fractions refined from his own urine into cancer cells grown in a lab from M.D. Anderson. He found some of the peptides to have anticancer properties. He eventually found that Antineoplaston A had the most broad spectrum of anticancer activity and began focusing on this peptide.
Through his research, he believes that the body has a backup to the immune system's ability to destroy cancer cells. Burzynski found that peptides were this backup system which could cause cells failing to go through normal cell death to regulate and begin to normalize apoptosis. Burzynski sees cancer as a programming error in cell division and cell death and antineoplastons or specific peptides are the solution to reprogram this error.
Despite Burzynski's success with difficult cases of brain tumors and other cancers, the FDA have continually brought him to court to try to strip him of his medical license. Oncologists who know about Dr. Burzynski refuse to give information to their patients even when there are no other options left in conventional medicine. Further, health insurance companies have Dr. Burynski flagged and will not cover his expensive, yet effective treatment protocols.
With everyone but his loyal patients against him, Dr. Burzynski persists to provide this necessary and valuable treatments to all who come to his clinic in Texas. When will he prevail and be able to mass produce his treatment that seems to be more effective without toxic side effects like chemotherapy and radiation? He has been battling to win since the 1970's and he will continue until justice and truth prevails in the cancer world.
I respect your decision to have radical breast surgery to "minimize" your chances of developing cancer. However, I do not respect your desire to influence other women to take that same path. Thus, I need to clear the air and share information that seemed to be missing in your decision to have a double mastectomy so that other women will have more options and understanding as they make crucial medical decisions.
First of all, I find it absolutely ludicrous that an actress has such influence in our world that women would be empowered to make a major medical decision simply based upon her decision.
lu·di·crousˈlo͞odəkrəs/ adjectiveso foolish, unreasonable, or out of place as to be amusing; ridiculous.
Let's explore the truth about the issue of genetics and cancer, specifically focusing on the BRCA genes and breast cancer. First of all, BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 genes are tumor suppressing genes. These genes assist in repairing damaged DNA as a result of radiation or environmental toxic exposure. Genes express and mutate depending upon signal molecules. Signal molecules, such as hormones, growth factors, and neuropeptides, attach to cell membranes in order to influence the expression or the mutation of genetic factors.
Thus, BRCA genes can be health protective and suppress tumors. When there is a decrease or mutation of the BRCA gene, there is a possibility for other oncogenes to turn on and tumor suppressor genes such as p53 to be mutated. Eventually, the expression and mutation of thousands of genetic factors could lead to the development of breast cancer, given a toxic, imbalanced, internal environment. However, it is not a direct or linear pathway. There must be many factors in place to lead to this cascade of genetic factors.
To declare that Angelina Jolie has bravely fought cancer and won is completely absurd. Yet, this is what some media outlets are declaring. Angelina Jolie never had cancer and chose to remove her breasts as an extreme "preventative" approach to cancer. However, Angelina Jolie has no more protected herself against the development of cancer than someone who has amputated their foot. The reality is that her body still has trophoblast cells capable of mutating into cancer cells given a toxic, oxygen-deprived, imbalanced, internal environment. Trophoblast cells are stem cells available to vital organs for healing and repair. Estrogen, steroid, or growth factors, can direct trophoblast cells to an area of the body that needs healing. When there is too much toxicity or damage to that particular area, these cells may have to mutate into cancer cells in order to survive. The origin of cancer at the cellular level comes from damage to the mitochondria which leads to the damage to DNA, not the reverse. Thus, for prevention and treatment options, we need to be focused more on repairing damaged mitochondria instead of repairing damaged DNA.
Unfortunately, the assumption since The Human Genome Project and The Cancer Atlas Project were launched, has been that damage to DNA is the origin of cancer. After the development of more than 700 targeted gene therapies with the hope of curing cancer, every single one has failed except for one. Simply because the origin of cancer does not come from damaged DNA, targeted gene therapy will never be a successful cancer treatment. Despite any evidence of clinical success, researchers continue to pursue targeted gene therapies with the hope of curing cancer. And more unfortunately, innocent people like Angelina Jolie end up making radical medical decisions not based upon proven scientific theory; rather, on an unproven hypothesis or theory that has yet to die.
I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news; however, Angelina, you still have the same possibility of developing cancer in any area of your body than you did prior to surgery. Your mitochondria have the same possibility of becoming damaged by toxins and your genes change every day based upon your exposure to carcinogens, nutrition, your thoughts, and your emotions. The best way to be proactive in preventing cancer is to minimize toxic exposure, minimize fear including the fear of developing cancer and the fear of death, increase nutrients which are protective against cancer, and educate yourself on epigenetics, nutrition, and sound science regarding how cancer develops in the body.
Angelina, the reality is that 1.3 million people have been over treated with Western Medical approaches to cancer. Many women have undergone unnecessary surgeries, chemotherapy, radiation, and mammograms. I hope that you and your family members do not end up being one of those who is over treated or radically treated in a situation that does not call for surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy.
So how did we get here? Assassinations? People being killed for teaching and training on topics and approaches to cancer and autism that mainstream is not ready to embrace?
It didn't start with assassinations. It started more subtly, manipulative, and sly. The pattern is clear when the facts are discovered, but they are hidden from plain sight and need to be sought out by the careful observer.
I like to think of myself as the careful, thoughtful observer. And I'm not afraid to look at something ugly, corrupt, and disdainful and call a spade a spade.
In many holistic treatment options discovered and developed by brilliant doctors and scientists, clinical trials were purposely sabotaged in order to block mainstream acceptance. Let's look at one such nutritional protocol, Vitamin B17 or Laetrile.
Dr. Krebs Jr. first discovered B17 and how it works to protect the body from the development of cancer. The B17 molecule contains two units of glucose, one of benzaldehyde, and one of cyanide. All these components are locked together and not immediately toxic to the body. There is, however, one substance that can unlock the B17 molecular and release cyanide. The enzyme beta-glucosidase can unlock and release the cyanide in B17. The most amazing and profound discovery by Dr. Krebs was the fact that cancer cells are the only cells which contain and utilize beta-glucosidase. When B17 comes in contact with a cancer cell, beta-glucosidase is released, cyanide and benzaldehyde are unbound and act like a smart bomb to attack the cancer cell and destroy its effects on the body.
Vitamin B17 has the ability to target cancer cells and not destroy healthy cells. One reason is that healthy cells contain a protective enzyme called rhodanese which is able to neutralize cyanide by converting it into healthy by products instantly. In fact, cyanide is converted by rhodanese into thiocyanate in the presence of sulfur. Thiocyanate regulates blood pressure and allows the body to produce Vitamin B12 in abundance. Further, B17 stimulates hemoglobin or the red blood cell count.
To further support the benefits of Vitamin B17 in regards to the prevention of cancer, we can look at cultures whose traditional diets are naturally high in Vitamin B17. The Hunza people and Eskimos both traditionally have consumed foods high in Vitamin B17. The Hunza people eat 30-50 apricot seeds per day which contain a high amount of B17 while Eskimos consume animal meat from animals grazing on grass high in B17 as well. With the traditional diet, Eskimos and Hunza people virtually have seen no incidents of cancer in their tribes. However, when exposed to modern diets low in Vitamin B17, the same incidence in cancer that we are seeing in the Western world begins to develop for the Hunza people and Eskimos.
Dr. Krebs Jr. was not assassinated for his cancer breakthrough. However, the science behind his discovery was attacked through clinical trials. At Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in Manhattan, Dr. Kanematsu Sugiura conducted clinical trials on Vitamin B17 between 1972-1977. Through his clinical trials, Dr. Sugiura found that 1. Laetrile or Vitamin B17 stopped metastasis in mice 2. The general health of the mice improved 3. It inhibited the growth of small tumors 4. It provided relief from pain 5. It acted as cancer prevention.
At the time, the board of directors at Sloan-Kettering was controlled by corporate executives representing the financial interests of pharmaceutical companies. Further, three Rockefellers were on the board. Prior to this clinical trial, Dr. Sugiura's work had never been challenged. Also, several other researchers successfully duplicated Sugiura's experiments, finding the same results. In fact, when Dr. Scholen added pancreatic enzymes to the Laetrile in mice, there was a 100% cure rate with the mice.
However, when the board of directors found out the significance of Dr. Sugiura's results, they demanded more clinical trials to be done. Dr. Sugiura was made to redo the clinical trial several times. The first two times, the results were the same, in favor of Laetrile or Vitamin B17. The last clinical trial was set up for failure. The mice were not put in separate groups, but allowed to mix freely, the control group with the trial group. Dr. Suigura warned Sloan-Kettering that it would make it impossible for the lab technicians to know which mice belonged to which group and would allow for the mice to be given the wrong protocol. Clearly, the results were sabotaged. The "results" of this trial was that salt water stopped growing tumors 40% of the time and Laetrile only arrested the cancer 27% of the time. This was the clinical trial that Sloan-Kettering decided to broadcast to the world because finally, Laetrile "failed."
Thus, assassinations were unnecessary in this situation. Shoot the clinical trial until it dies and the labor, research, and discovery of the scientist will be null and void. Unfortunately, sabotaging clinical trials that did not show favorably towards the standard of care has been quite common and we will continue to look at other situations in the past where major cancer breakthroughs were silenced and killed through various means.
"Assassination is the extreme form of censorship." George Shaw Before we dive into assassination, censorship, and my truth theories, let's wrap up about radical remissions. Last week, we established that radical remissions do occur in cancer and have potential to occur. First of all, I prefer to use the language radical remission as opposed to spontaneous remission. Spontaneous remission implies that the person who heals was doing absolutely nothing to receive a healing, simply sitting on their couch eating donuts and watching TV when all of a sudden their tumor dissolves with absolutely no engagement on their part. When you look extensively into the lives, choices, attitudes, and involvement of people who have radical remissions, you find that their remissions are everything but unexpected, spontaneous, and without any personal engagement.
Here are a few definitions of spontaneous:
(of a process or event) occurring without apparent external cause
Performed or occurring as a result of a sudden inner impulse or inclination and without premeditation or external stimulus.
People who have experienced what doctors term "spontaneous remissions" would probably never say that their tumors disappeared without external stimulus. Rather, they would point to many deliberate, well thought out, conscious processes that they engaged in both internally and externally in order to bring healing and wholeness to their body. The reason why they are termed "spontaneous remission" is because the doctor cannot claim that it was the chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery that caused this sudden remission. And because doctors do not implement any other tools besides chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery, there is no explanation that they would be able to take credit for or to be able to understand clinically. Thus, the external stimulus is dismissed and ignored.
The word patient means "to submit." Patients of medical treatments are expected to receive their treatment plan without question and to submit to the expertise and knowledge of the doctor. In most cases of radical remissions, the "patient" tends to take a more active role, researching and understanding their condition, finding other ways to support themselves during the healing process, and in some situations refusing the recommendation of the doctor because of their own knowledge, sense of what needs to be done, intuition, or finding another doctor or practitioner to work with on the healing path.
One doctor who was not unfamiliar with radical remissions and amazing cancer recovery stories, Dr. Nicolas Gonzalez was a brilliant cancer doctor in NYC who tragically died last July, 2015. Initially, it was suspected that Dr. Nicolas Gonzalez died of a heart attack. However, initial autopsy results concluded that he did not die of a heart attack.
In fact, in the last year, there have been about 33 holistic doctors who have died suddenly. Some of suspected suicide, some of "heart attacks", and some murdered. The strange fact is that some of these holistic doctors had a connection together and were using similar tests such as thermography scans instead of mammograms, an immune support called GCMAF used for autism and cancer to promote macrophage activity in the body, and were outspoken about the dangers and potential side effects from routine vaccinations. There are many things that stand out in all these situations. The first is that the holistic doctors ranged in age from 30's-60's and many family members and friends of those who died are questioning why they died or why they "committed suicide" as either they were very healthy or they were not suicidal.
Dr. Bradstreet was known in the autism world and treated autistic children holistically, having amazing results. Last summer, he was found in a river, shot twice in the chest by a rifle. The case is still open, but the first speculation was suicide. Despite the fact that his family members stated he was not suicidal and not depressed. Despite the fact that it is very difficult to shoot yourself twice in the chest with a rifle and then jump into a river.
And there are 31 more holistic doctors that are dead in less than a year. All were outspoken, all were effective in their clinical practice, and all were very healthy. What is going on?
Is it possible that these doctors are being targeted and murdered in an attempt to censor the public and maintain status quo of Western medical practices, Big Pharma, FDA, and to quiet the voices of those who are actually seeing success in extreme cases of autism, cancer, with natural remedies and without the use of Big Pharma.
"Assassination is the extreme form of censorship." George Shaw
Public assassination is much easier to understand and unravel such as Martin Luther King Jr. and JFK. However, there are so many details to unravel in the lives of these 33 holistic doctors to figure out exactly what happened.
I don't know what happened. However, as a truth theorist, I am suspicious of a connection. It would make more sense at this point for there to be a connection rather than 33 completely bizarre events of 33 people working in the same domain, with equal platform and success, and with collaborative efforts.
Dr. Nicolas Gonzalez was infamous for treating and helping Suzanne Sommers overcome a cancer diagnosis. He wrote books about the trophoblast theory of cancer and used pancreatic proteolytic enzymes to treat cancer (along with many other protocols and support). The trophoblast theory on cancer is based on the lifes' work of 2 doctors/scientists: John Beard and Dr. William Kelly. John Beard was a scientist who first studied and discovered how trophoblast cells create the placenta in the womb of a mother. Normally, the human immune system is trained to tag and attack any foreign matter. If a baby were to develop outside of a placenta, the immune system could potentially tag and attack the cells of the embryo, deeming it "foreign matter." However, trophoblast cells play a critical role to building a healthy baby in the womb. Trophoblast cells carry a negatively charged protein coating, which causes the immune system to be repelled instead of attracted to their energy. With beautiful synergy, the placenta is completed by the trophoblast cells at the same moment that the pancreas of the baby starts to produce pancreatic proteolytic enzymes. John Beard discovered that the pancreatic proteolytic enzymes disabled trophoblast cells right at the moment that the placenta is fully formed and now are no longer necessary.
Further, John Beard found that trophoblast cells act similar to cancer cells in the body. Cancer cells have a negatively charged protein coating. Cancer cells are invasive, undifferentiated, and aggressively multiple similar to the trophoblast cells which create the placenta. John Beard's theory was that to effectively treat cancer, high doses of proteolytic enzymes were necessary to disable the negatively charged protein coating of cancer cells in order to allow the immune system to become attracted to the cancer cells instead of repelled. He started to help doctors to use IV treatments of proteolytic enzymes and began to see the clinical application of his research as an absolute success. His life's work was embraced by a few doctors, but was never accepted in the mainstream, despite the great results.
However, Dr. William Kelly was able to later discover the research of John Beard and treated his own pancreatic cancer using proteolytic enzymes. He successfully recovered and would have been deemed a case of "spontaneous remission" by his own doctors. He began to help people diagnosed with cancer with astounding results.
Dr. Nicolas Gonzalez later connected with Dr. William Kelly and began to learn from his work and was mentored by Dr. Kelly. Prior to his death, Dr. Nicolas Gonzalez had successfully treated thousands of cancer patients. Because of his success, he was able to have a NCI funded clinical study on his pancreatic enzyme protocol. Through much resistance, the clinical trials were sabotaged as Dr. Nicolas Gonzalez writes about in one of his many books. In many of his lectures, he spoke openly about how the government or FDA would wish that he would get hit by a bus and die. Ironically, he did die in a strange manner as the autopsy revealed it was not a heart attack and it has not been released as to what was the cause of death.
Was the death of Dr. Nicolas Gonzalez and Dr. Bradstreet an attempt of censorship from a government agency or from Big Pharma or some other public entity wanting to maintain control over the beliefs, practices, and mind sets of the American people?
I don't know. But it is really creepy to me and it is not beyond the realm of possibility. Especially since we have 33 holistic doctors dead in less than one year, all involved in great work in cancer and autism.
