543
About quackery, drinking soda, and evidence-based medicine
Method of treatment of cancer with baking soda — it's not nonsense and quackery, it's therapy.
We tried to figure out where it ends and the quackery begins medicine.
It all started with the fact that we have received from readers writing regarding the article "no One knows how many actually suffered from vaccination".
A letter to readers
This is an abridged translation of an article by the American physician Joseph Mercola made me, so I especially paid attention to the review.
Dear reader compares Dr. Mercola with Gennady Malakhov and accuses him of quackery.
This comparison surprised me a bit. I regularly read articles by this author, but never faced with the fact that his recommendations were based on medical prescriptions or for the phases of the moon. On the contrary, Joseph Mercola almost every article refers to the scientific medical work. That translated my article — not that other, as the analysis of a study conducted by the American Institute of medicine — highly respected, including for U.S. government organization.
I can not agree with the dear reader in the fact that the author advises against vaccinations. Dr. Mercola, of course, very passionately criticizes the modern American practice of vaccination as unsafe and encourages all parents not to blindly follow the vaccination calendar, and carefully consider the balance of benefit and risk of complications for each of them. However, this position is not only he, but also a huge number of savvy physicians who practice within conventional medicine.
The only vaccine, which he called flatly refuse a vaccine against papillomavirus. But here he is not alone. This vaccine caused an outcry not only among health care activists but also among doctors, occupying a high position in the official medical world in Europe.
It is difficult to disagree with Joseph Mercola in his critique of pharmaceutical companies, given that each of them has its own list of lost lawsuits over charges of illegal marketing, as well as causing disability or even death to patients taking their drugs. It should be noted that in his critical articles about manufacturers and their products Mercola adheres strictly to the facts published in many American and British publications.
Dr. Joseph Mercola
But one of the claims reader, to admit, has me stumped. Dr. Mercola accused of supporting "another charlatan", named Tullio Simoncini, who put forward the hypothesis that cancer is a fungal disease. Dr. Simoncini has refused chemotherapy and began treating malignant tumors ordinary baking soda, which, as you know, protivogribkovye effect, for which he was stripped of his license at home, in Italy.
I've never heard of Dr. Simoncini, and decided that over time it is necessary to fill this gap. In actual fact I've added another item: "Dr. Simoncini. Cancer cure sodium bicarbonate". I got the list is long and would have passed a month or two before he reached to turn to "another charlatan" if by chance one of the online resources that are not directly related to medicine, I did not see a link to the article Grant to Fuel Baking Soda Cancer Therapy Research, which literally means: "Grant to support research in the use of baking soda as a therapy against cancer".
"Wow humbug! — I gasped — the University of Arizona gets $ 2 million from the National Institute of health, USA to study!" and drinking soda along with Dr. Simoncini has moved from the bottom of my list in the short list.
A study by the University of Arizona
Let's start with him. Here are excerpts from the same article from the official website of the University:
"There is evidence that drinking soda reduces or completely stops the spread of breast cancer to the lungs, brain and bone tissue of the patient, but the excess of it can damage the healthy organs. Two-million grant from the National Institute of medicine will allow the University of Arizona to improve methods for measuring the effectiveness of oral administration of baking soda in the fight against breast cancer".
That said project Manager mark PAGEL, researcher Department of biomedical engineering University:
"...a malignant tumors during their growth produce lactic acid, which destroys the surrounding tissue, making the tumor a road in a neighboring region, thus, metastases invade other organs. Acid is besides increases resistance to cancer chemotherapy."
Jennifer Barton, Professor
Here is the opinion of Professor Jennifer Barton, head of the Department of biomedical engineering:
"...some cancer drugs are only effective at a certain value of acid-alkaline balance in the body of the patient. To adjust its acid-alkaline balance and thus make the drugs are effective patients may very easily simply by taking a solution of baking soda, but always under the supervision of a doctor."
In medical databases, I found several references to earlier studies of scientists at the University of Arizona on the use of baking soda for the treatment of malignant tumors, as well as a very interesting work of Chinese scientists who observed an improvement 88% of patients with cancer of the liver with arterial introduction of a solution of sodium bicarbonate.
Amazing, isn't it? What could be worse than a malignant tumor, like an octopus, which spreads its tentacles in organs and tissues of the living human body? What could be simpler than drinking soda, which is in any, even the most modest and cheap kitchen cupboard? The idea is to overcome the monster pinch penny white powder at first glance, do seem to be defeated, but to imagine that the University of Arizona, and the national Institute of health, USA captured charlatans, only in a nightmare.
But what about the fungus?
On the Internet a lot of materials in Russian and English, dedicated to the exposure of the method Tulio Simoncini. Some of his critics write that the Italian doctor believes the cancer fungal colony, others — what he calls the fungus is the cause of this terrible disease. The hypotheses are quite different from each other, but both are characterized by the whistleblowers as nonsense, not supported by modern ideas about the origin of cancer disease.
Dr. Tullio Simoncini
To find out what exactly is the theory Simoncini, give a word to the accused.
"...the answer to the question of what causes a degenerative disease can be found in the discipline, which has given luster to medicine, turning it from a simple practice in science, namely to Microbiology," writes Simoncini on his website. "It is quite clear that, with the exception of such section, as bacteriology, our knowledge of Microbiology is still very limited, especially in terms of viruses, sub-viruses and fungi whose pathogenic potential, unfortunately, is very poorly understood. I am confident that by focusing on one of the shady areas, namely to Mycology, the study of fungal infections, we will be able to get answers to many questions related to the problem of tumors". And further: "There are elements of knowledge supporting the view that all types of cancer — as it happens in the plant world, are caused by fungal infections".
The assertion that fungal infections occur in all types of cancer, it sounds strained, but otherwise the logic Simoncini struck me as quite sensible. Cancer cells are mutated normal cells, but the factors causing these mutations, i.e. having Carcinogenicity, are numerous: it's the radiation, variety of chemical agents, and even viruses, so why the hypothesis of a carcinogenic potential of the fungus seems to be the critics quack Simoncini? So I reasoned that entering into a medical database options for phrases, linking a fungal infection, and cancer. And here I was waiting for the next opening.
Evidence-based medicine
Only in electronic database studies published in reputable scientific journals, SpringerLink even the most superficial search found 664 links to studies confirming the carcinogenic properties of mycotoxins. Quite a lot of them in other reliable medical database — PubMed. The earliest discovered from my research is the work of Japanese scientists forty years ago "Carcinogens produced by fungi" (Annu Rev Microbiol. 1972;26:279-312. Carcinogens produced by fungi. Enomoto M, Saito M.) That work 1985 "Mycotoxins as carcinogens" (Mycotoxins as carcinogens. Hussain AM.)
Mycotoxins are poisons secreted by microscopic fungi parasitizing on cereals, legumes, sunflower seeds, and fruits and vegetables. They can be formed during storage in many foods and into food animals and people. There are enough experiments with animals, confirming the Carcinogenicity of mycotoxins for them, and in the study of Chinese scientists in 1995 discovered a correlation between cancer of esophagitis among residents of the district, Qi Xian and a high content of mycotoxins in wheat in the area. This is not the type of fungus, which has meant Simoncini, but the fact of the Carcinogenicity of fungal toxin to humans suggests that the idea of linking a fungal infection to cancer is not in the strict sense unscientific.
FB-page Center soda Simoncini
Simoncini on his website refers to modern studies that show that cancer as a concomitant disease is characterized by the candidiasis (defeat of the organism strains of the fungus Candida). Indeed, in September 2000 at the interdisciplinary Conference on antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy in Toronto had before it the report of the international group of researchers "risk Factors and prognostic factors for cancer patients with refractory candidiasis", which notes that the risk of death is significantly increased in patients suffering from resistant (not treatable) forms of candidiasis compared with patients whose candidiasis has been treated.
Similar data can be found in recent publications of works by Greek and French scientists. In the French study noted that up to 70% of patients with cancers localized to the head and neck during and after a course of radio-therapy suffer from a candidiasis. In the Greek we are talking about increased risk of fatal outcome for patients with invasive forms of fungal infections.
Simoncini argues from the accepted point of view on candidiasis as a consequence of the weakening of the body due to cancer and exposure to anti-cancer therapies. He believes the Candida the cause, not the consequence of a malignant tumor. But a cause or an effect is candidiasis, curing it, we increase the patient's chances of survival, says evidence-based medicine and on the same bases its therapy Italian doctor called in a huge number of online resources charlatan.
In addition to differences in the evaluation of causal relationships of cancer and candidiasis, in theory Simoncini is another important difference from the point of view of evidence-based medicine. He fundamentally believes that the introduction of sodium bicarbonate aims to just get rid of the fungus, while scientists from Arizona see its important function in the regulation of acid-base balance of the body. Can we say on the basis of these discrepancies that Tullio Simoncini is a charlatan? If very specific the diagnosis, the doctor applies the same treatment, some time after his first experience recognized a very promising, in my humble opinion, this quackery can not be named. Another question, what are the personal qualities Tullio Simoncini? After all, the doctor of high qualification may be soulless doctor-grabber for the sick — a source of enrichment.
Who are you, Dr. Simoncini?
Alas, a conclusion I came. On the Internet blogs and websites critical of the method of Simoncini, but his own. On his conscience the death of several patients of the disease which he, nevertheless, managed to cash in.
I think that this article is in some degree biased, though, because what the authors write that the theory and method of Simoncini is located entirely outside the framework of modern evidence-based medicine, not bothering to check, whether so it actually. May be, and information about patients deceived and ruined the lives of the authors of the article are not tested and represent the idle rumours? It is also possible that these patients actually died, but the doctor is not to blame, just cancer — a disease which, unfortunately, very many of the ends the worst way.
Likely to trust information on judicial term, obtained and served Simoncini for the patient's death in 2003, especially since this information is followed by a reference to the Italian newspaper. Terminally ill patient died from perforation of the intestine during the infusion of sodium bicarbonate solution. It is unclear whether a fatal error with obvious negligence of the doctor or is the result of a tragic accident, but even in a situation when the patient is terminally ill, this error is punishable by law.
And in the article about the death of another of the patients Simoncini stated that the family of the deceased does not claim to the doctor, because the chances of their father and husband for survival were extremely low.
Terribly sorry for the girl, dead at age 25 from cancer of the uterus, which, according to the blog post, Simoncini lied, saying that she was completely cured. But in cancer of the uterus, which suffered a young woman, the chances of survival with timely surgical intervention is very high. But was it all exactly as told to us in the blog?
I also write about that Italian doctor likes luxury and, conversely, does not like to pay taxes with your not modest, at least, of the income...
Of course, on the website Tulio Simoncini and other resources on the Internet there are testimonies of patients cured them, but again, it is unclear whether they can be trusted. Perhaps we could better evaluate it as a practitioner when his solo (authentic!) statistics and official statistics of the ratio of cases of recovery and death for cancer patients.
I'll try to give a portrait of Tullio Simoncini as he sees me after I examined all available materials about this obviously extraordinary man. I don't pretend to be objective, because, as I already noted above, a number of facts remains in question. So: a talented doctor, thinking outside the box, enthusiastic, daring, tearing templates, who loves money and luxury, are prone to fraud taking hasty decisions and acting without delay, saving lives and committing tragic and unforgivable mistakes.
But whatever was the case personally with Simoncini, a method of treatment of cancer with baking soda — it's not nonsense and quackery, it is a therapy which gives hope that the outcome of the cancer often is not death, but life. The feasibility of this hope? It is, as always in medicine, the question, but scientific studies give reason for optimism.
Also interesting: Walter Last: a New approach to cancer treatment
A quiet revolution in Oncology
In conclusion I want to say thank you dear reader for what she inspired me on a quest, the fruit of which became this article.published
Author: Marina SOLODOVNIKOVA
The materials are for informational purposes. Remember, self-life-threatening, for advice regarding the use of any medicines and methods of treatment, contact your doctor.
Source: www.miloserdie.ru/article/pro-sharlatanstvo-pitevuyu-sodu-i-dokazatelnuyu-medicinu/
We tried to figure out where it ends and the quackery begins medicine.
It all started with the fact that we have received from readers writing regarding the article "no One knows how many actually suffered from vaccination".
A letter to readers
This is an abridged translation of an article by the American physician Joseph Mercola made me, so I especially paid attention to the review.
Dear reader compares Dr. Mercola with Gennady Malakhov and accuses him of quackery.
This comparison surprised me a bit. I regularly read articles by this author, but never faced with the fact that his recommendations were based on medical prescriptions or for the phases of the moon. On the contrary, Joseph Mercola almost every article refers to the scientific medical work. That translated my article — not that other, as the analysis of a study conducted by the American Institute of medicine — highly respected, including for U.S. government organization.
I can not agree with the dear reader in the fact that the author advises against vaccinations. Dr. Mercola, of course, very passionately criticizes the modern American practice of vaccination as unsafe and encourages all parents not to blindly follow the vaccination calendar, and carefully consider the balance of benefit and risk of complications for each of them. However, this position is not only he, but also a huge number of savvy physicians who practice within conventional medicine.
The only vaccine, which he called flatly refuse a vaccine against papillomavirus. But here he is not alone. This vaccine caused an outcry not only among health care activists but also among doctors, occupying a high position in the official medical world in Europe.
It is difficult to disagree with Joseph Mercola in his critique of pharmaceutical companies, given that each of them has its own list of lost lawsuits over charges of illegal marketing, as well as causing disability or even death to patients taking their drugs. It should be noted that in his critical articles about manufacturers and their products Mercola adheres strictly to the facts published in many American and British publications.
Dr. Joseph Mercola
But one of the claims reader, to admit, has me stumped. Dr. Mercola accused of supporting "another charlatan", named Tullio Simoncini, who put forward the hypothesis that cancer is a fungal disease. Dr. Simoncini has refused chemotherapy and began treating malignant tumors ordinary baking soda, which, as you know, protivogribkovye effect, for which he was stripped of his license at home, in Italy.
I've never heard of Dr. Simoncini, and decided that over time it is necessary to fill this gap. In actual fact I've added another item: "Dr. Simoncini. Cancer cure sodium bicarbonate". I got the list is long and would have passed a month or two before he reached to turn to "another charlatan" if by chance one of the online resources that are not directly related to medicine, I did not see a link to the article Grant to Fuel Baking Soda Cancer Therapy Research, which literally means: "Grant to support research in the use of baking soda as a therapy against cancer".
"Wow humbug! — I gasped — the University of Arizona gets $ 2 million from the National Institute of health, USA to study!" and drinking soda along with Dr. Simoncini has moved from the bottom of my list in the short list.
A study by the University of Arizona
Let's start with him. Here are excerpts from the same article from the official website of the University:
"There is evidence that drinking soda reduces or completely stops the spread of breast cancer to the lungs, brain and bone tissue of the patient, but the excess of it can damage the healthy organs. Two-million grant from the National Institute of medicine will allow the University of Arizona to improve methods for measuring the effectiveness of oral administration of baking soda in the fight against breast cancer".
That said project Manager mark PAGEL, researcher Department of biomedical engineering University:
"...a malignant tumors during their growth produce lactic acid, which destroys the surrounding tissue, making the tumor a road in a neighboring region, thus, metastases invade other organs. Acid is besides increases resistance to cancer chemotherapy."
Jennifer Barton, Professor
Here is the opinion of Professor Jennifer Barton, head of the Department of biomedical engineering:
"...some cancer drugs are only effective at a certain value of acid-alkaline balance in the body of the patient. To adjust its acid-alkaline balance and thus make the drugs are effective patients may very easily simply by taking a solution of baking soda, but always under the supervision of a doctor."
In medical databases, I found several references to earlier studies of scientists at the University of Arizona on the use of baking soda for the treatment of malignant tumors, as well as a very interesting work of Chinese scientists who observed an improvement 88% of patients with cancer of the liver with arterial introduction of a solution of sodium bicarbonate.
Amazing, isn't it? What could be worse than a malignant tumor, like an octopus, which spreads its tentacles in organs and tissues of the living human body? What could be simpler than drinking soda, which is in any, even the most modest and cheap kitchen cupboard? The idea is to overcome the monster pinch penny white powder at first glance, do seem to be defeated, but to imagine that the University of Arizona, and the national Institute of health, USA captured charlatans, only in a nightmare.
But what about the fungus?
On the Internet a lot of materials in Russian and English, dedicated to the exposure of the method Tulio Simoncini. Some of his critics write that the Italian doctor believes the cancer fungal colony, others — what he calls the fungus is the cause of this terrible disease. The hypotheses are quite different from each other, but both are characterized by the whistleblowers as nonsense, not supported by modern ideas about the origin of cancer disease.
Dr. Tullio Simoncini
To find out what exactly is the theory Simoncini, give a word to the accused.
"...the answer to the question of what causes a degenerative disease can be found in the discipline, which has given luster to medicine, turning it from a simple practice in science, namely to Microbiology," writes Simoncini on his website. "It is quite clear that, with the exception of such section, as bacteriology, our knowledge of Microbiology is still very limited, especially in terms of viruses, sub-viruses and fungi whose pathogenic potential, unfortunately, is very poorly understood. I am confident that by focusing on one of the shady areas, namely to Mycology, the study of fungal infections, we will be able to get answers to many questions related to the problem of tumors". And further: "There are elements of knowledge supporting the view that all types of cancer — as it happens in the plant world, are caused by fungal infections".
The assertion that fungal infections occur in all types of cancer, it sounds strained, but otherwise the logic Simoncini struck me as quite sensible. Cancer cells are mutated normal cells, but the factors causing these mutations, i.e. having Carcinogenicity, are numerous: it's the radiation, variety of chemical agents, and even viruses, so why the hypothesis of a carcinogenic potential of the fungus seems to be the critics quack Simoncini? So I reasoned that entering into a medical database options for phrases, linking a fungal infection, and cancer. And here I was waiting for the next opening.
Evidence-based medicine
Only in electronic database studies published in reputable scientific journals, SpringerLink even the most superficial search found 664 links to studies confirming the carcinogenic properties of mycotoxins. Quite a lot of them in other reliable medical database — PubMed. The earliest discovered from my research is the work of Japanese scientists forty years ago "Carcinogens produced by fungi" (Annu Rev Microbiol. 1972;26:279-312. Carcinogens produced by fungi. Enomoto M, Saito M.) That work 1985 "Mycotoxins as carcinogens" (Mycotoxins as carcinogens. Hussain AM.)
Mycotoxins are poisons secreted by microscopic fungi parasitizing on cereals, legumes, sunflower seeds, and fruits and vegetables. They can be formed during storage in many foods and into food animals and people. There are enough experiments with animals, confirming the Carcinogenicity of mycotoxins for them, and in the study of Chinese scientists in 1995 discovered a correlation between cancer of esophagitis among residents of the district, Qi Xian and a high content of mycotoxins in wheat in the area. This is not the type of fungus, which has meant Simoncini, but the fact of the Carcinogenicity of fungal toxin to humans suggests that the idea of linking a fungal infection to cancer is not in the strict sense unscientific.
FB-page Center soda Simoncini
Simoncini on his website refers to modern studies that show that cancer as a concomitant disease is characterized by the candidiasis (defeat of the organism strains of the fungus Candida). Indeed, in September 2000 at the interdisciplinary Conference on antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy in Toronto had before it the report of the international group of researchers "risk Factors and prognostic factors for cancer patients with refractory candidiasis", which notes that the risk of death is significantly increased in patients suffering from resistant (not treatable) forms of candidiasis compared with patients whose candidiasis has been treated.
Similar data can be found in recent publications of works by Greek and French scientists. In the French study noted that up to 70% of patients with cancers localized to the head and neck during and after a course of radio-therapy suffer from a candidiasis. In the Greek we are talking about increased risk of fatal outcome for patients with invasive forms of fungal infections.
Simoncini argues from the accepted point of view on candidiasis as a consequence of the weakening of the body due to cancer and exposure to anti-cancer therapies. He believes the Candida the cause, not the consequence of a malignant tumor. But a cause or an effect is candidiasis, curing it, we increase the patient's chances of survival, says evidence-based medicine and on the same bases its therapy Italian doctor called in a huge number of online resources charlatan.
In addition to differences in the evaluation of causal relationships of cancer and candidiasis, in theory Simoncini is another important difference from the point of view of evidence-based medicine. He fundamentally believes that the introduction of sodium bicarbonate aims to just get rid of the fungus, while scientists from Arizona see its important function in the regulation of acid-base balance of the body. Can we say on the basis of these discrepancies that Tullio Simoncini is a charlatan? If very specific the diagnosis, the doctor applies the same treatment, some time after his first experience recognized a very promising, in my humble opinion, this quackery can not be named. Another question, what are the personal qualities Tullio Simoncini? After all, the doctor of high qualification may be soulless doctor-grabber for the sick — a source of enrichment.
Who are you, Dr. Simoncini?
Alas, a conclusion I came. On the Internet blogs and websites critical of the method of Simoncini, but his own. On his conscience the death of several patients of the disease which he, nevertheless, managed to cash in.
I think that this article is in some degree biased, though, because what the authors write that the theory and method of Simoncini is located entirely outside the framework of modern evidence-based medicine, not bothering to check, whether so it actually. May be, and information about patients deceived and ruined the lives of the authors of the article are not tested and represent the idle rumours? It is also possible that these patients actually died, but the doctor is not to blame, just cancer — a disease which, unfortunately, very many of the ends the worst way.
Likely to trust information on judicial term, obtained and served Simoncini for the patient's death in 2003, especially since this information is followed by a reference to the Italian newspaper. Terminally ill patient died from perforation of the intestine during the infusion of sodium bicarbonate solution. It is unclear whether a fatal error with obvious negligence of the doctor or is the result of a tragic accident, but even in a situation when the patient is terminally ill, this error is punishable by law.
And in the article about the death of another of the patients Simoncini stated that the family of the deceased does not claim to the doctor, because the chances of their father and husband for survival were extremely low.
Terribly sorry for the girl, dead at age 25 from cancer of the uterus, which, according to the blog post, Simoncini lied, saying that she was completely cured. But in cancer of the uterus, which suffered a young woman, the chances of survival with timely surgical intervention is very high. But was it all exactly as told to us in the blog?
I also write about that Italian doctor likes luxury and, conversely, does not like to pay taxes with your not modest, at least, of the income...
Of course, on the website Tulio Simoncini and other resources on the Internet there are testimonies of patients cured them, but again, it is unclear whether they can be trusted. Perhaps we could better evaluate it as a practitioner when his solo (authentic!) statistics and official statistics of the ratio of cases of recovery and death for cancer patients.
I'll try to give a portrait of Tullio Simoncini as he sees me after I examined all available materials about this obviously extraordinary man. I don't pretend to be objective, because, as I already noted above, a number of facts remains in question. So: a talented doctor, thinking outside the box, enthusiastic, daring, tearing templates, who loves money and luxury, are prone to fraud taking hasty decisions and acting without delay, saving lives and committing tragic and unforgivable mistakes.
But whatever was the case personally with Simoncini, a method of treatment of cancer with baking soda — it's not nonsense and quackery, it is a therapy which gives hope that the outcome of the cancer often is not death, but life. The feasibility of this hope? It is, as always in medicine, the question, but scientific studies give reason for optimism.
Also interesting: Walter Last: a New approach to cancer treatment
A quiet revolution in Oncology
In conclusion I want to say thank you dear reader for what she inspired me on a quest, the fruit of which became this article.published
Author: Marina SOLODOVNIKOVA
The materials are for informational purposes. Remember, self-life-threatening, for advice regarding the use of any medicines and methods of treatment, contact your doctor.
Source: www.miloserdie.ru/article/pro-sharlatanstvo-pitevuyu-sodu-i-dokazatelnuyu-medicinu/
