Re: Re: Maple syrup and Baking Soda

[Guest guest]

At 10:28 PM 3/27/2008, wrote:

>I still don't understand, if this is the case, how Dr Simoncini gets

>his results ...

,

We are discussing several related topics:

Use of sugar:

Sugar does have its uses in cancer therapy, but it is a technical

field. You have to really understand your strategy. It might be one

of including 2-deoxyglucose to thwart the cancer, or it could be one

of taking advantage of specific receptor sites in the use of various

glycosides. It is poor strategy to stake one's life on a folklore

tale such as the maple syrup legend.

Alkalinization:

This has its uses, but there is wide variation in the

strategies. There have been suspicions that sodium bicarbonate can

accelerate the growth of cancer. Boik removed this

alkalinization strategy from his book on natural cancer therapies

when he came out with a second edition. Alkalinization of tumors can

increase the effectiveness of some chemo agents due to ion trapping

of some weakly basic chemotherapies. Similarly, acidification of

tumors can enhance the uptake of weakly acidic chemotherapies. The

acid milieu of a tumor from lactate, sialate, etc. contributes to the

regional inhibition of immune function. Many cancer patients seem to

be quite acidic in several body compartments. This acidification

might contribute to cancer growth or it might be a result of cancer

growth, or both. Experimentation with alkalinization is not foolish,

but there are better ways of doing this than choosing sodium bases.

Route of administration:

Alkaline solutions have been used for intralesional and peritumoral

injections ever since the invention of the syringe. It is not just

bicarbonates and hydroxides, but there are thousands and thousands of

things you can inject into tumors and inhibit their growth and maybe

even kill them. They can be useful, but there is a fad quality to it

too. A while back it was urea and every one was injecting 15% urea,

then it was the injecting of hydrogen peroxide. There have been fans

of intratumoral injections of ethanol, of hot saline, of

bromopyruvate, and of various sclerosing agents. It might be harder

to find injectables that don't interfere with cancer growth.

Simoncini:

Dr. Simoncini is a clinician who subscribes to cancer etiologies and

treatments that are largely passed over by the mainstream. He is

probably telling the truth about the cases in which his strategies

have succeeded. I don't think he finds it very interesting to report

the cases that he loses. We need prospective studies, not more

best-case reporting. A cancer patient needs to have a rational basis

for selecting a therapy.

[Guest guest]

Most conventional treatments for cancer have

something in common with most alternative

treatments for cancer: their mediocrity. We

know why conventional medicine is mediocre. It

is because of indoctrination and entrainment by

the olde guarde, enforced compliance with the

dictates of the megapharm-government axis, and fear of liability.

But what makes alternative cancer treatments

mediocre? I see two main factors and each is a part of human nature:

1. Simplemindedness. We want fast answers that

we can understand even if they are wrong. We are

too quick to buy into any answer so we can get

back to the television. We have no patience for nuanced thoughts.

2. We like to form affinity groups around heros

with unconventional medical explanations.

Examples:

Hero Affinity Group

Thomson Thomsonian Botanic Physicians

Hahnemann Homeopathy

Baker Eddy Christian Science

L. Ron Hubbard Scientology

Edgar

Cayce Association for Research and Enlightenment

Rudolf Steiner Anthroposophical Medicine

Johanna Budwig Flax oil cottage cheese believers

Otto Warburg The oxygen therapy crowd

Linus ing The Vitamin C crowd

AbulKalam Shamsuddin The IP-6 followers

F. Koch The glyoxylide group

Manju Ray The methylglyoxal believers

Lane The shark cartilage users

of God The pilgrims in white

Tullio Simoncini The bicarbonate-candida group

Brewer The cesium believers

Harvey Kellogg The colon detoxers

Harry Hoxsey The salves and tonics

Rene Caisse The Essiac tea believers

Hulda The liver parasite zappers

Harold Manner The laetrile believers

Beard// The proteolytic enzyme believers

Virginia Livingston The bacterial origin believers

Royal

Rife The

Rife device inventors and followers

Hudson The ormus alchemists

Nikolay Shevchenko The Vodka and oil drinkers

Emanuel Revici Eponymous followers

Günther Enderlein Sanum therapy subscribers

Gaston Naessens The 714-X generation

Harve Kaufman Zeolite MLMers

Rudolf Breuss Root juice dieters

Aajanus Vonderplanitz Raw meat dieters

Michio Kushi Macrobiotic dieters

Malkmus Hallelujah dieters

Cornelis Moerman Citrus Dieters

Joe Hart Oxalic Acid eaters

Bjorn

Nordenstrom

Electrical fields and tumor electrocutors

....and many, many more. In most cases the cancer

hero developed a theory and then formulated a

cure or treatment. Every single hero has a great

story as to how they developed their cancer

theory and their subsequent treatment

strategy. There is always some truth to their

teaching and there always seems to be a coterie

of devout and pious fundamentalist

devotees. Each therapy seems to attract

adherents for which it is a perfect fit. The

faithful should no more be denied their right to

practice their medical belief than we would deny

one the right to practice their religious faith.

There is no question that some of these therapies

are better than others. As long as the

government stays out of the picture, the cream will rise to the top.

At 12:40 PM 3/28/2008, you wrote:

>VGammill wrote:

>Dr. Simoncini is a clinician who subscribes to cancer etiologies and

>treatments that are largely passed over by the mainstream. He is

>probably telling the truth about the cases in which his strategies

>have succeeded. I don't think he finds it very interesting to report

>the cases that he loses. We need prospective studies, not more

>best-case reporting. A cancer patient needs to have a rational basis

>for selecting a therapy.

> >

>

>Please forgive my ignorance, but aren't most

>alternative treatments largely (or totally)

>passed over by the mainstream? I thought that's

>what this list was for ... and, indeed, natural

>oncology? I'm not trying to be argumentative ... just trying to understand.

>

>xxo

>

[Guest guest]

How do you take your Maple Syrup /Baking soda? My brother in law has a

fungus condition on his skin.. I suggested to him to take Borax but this

sounds like it would be a better attack on the fungus.

Thanks!

From: bowel cleanse [mailto:bowel cleanse ] On

Behalf Of elfnori

Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 10:47 AM

bowel cleanse

Subject: Re: Maple syrup and baking soda

Candida LOVES sugar. If you feed it sugar it grows and spreads. If you feed

it sugar with a killer attached, it dies. Simple Trojan horse concept. By

pairing the two you're targeting the poison right at the candida.

Baking soda taken internally to oxygenate the blood and treat cancer has

lots of references in an internet search. Taking without the maple syrup

will treat the body, taken with maple syrup will target the cancer, changing

the food as well as changing the environment.

That's the way I understand it.

By moderating my diet to reduce the available sugars (no fruit, no sugar)

and mixing the sugar I do take in (maple syrup) with a fungus killer (baking

soda), I seem to be quickly reducing the candida in my body. To me, it's

empirical. YMMV

N

>

> Nori

>

> Very interesting. Why do you need the maple syrup. If not maple syrup, why

couldn't honey or agave syrup or something else? What would happen if you

just took baking soda and chased it with water?

>

> Thanks

> GB

>

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature

database 5335 (20100802) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature

database 5349 (20100807) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com