Simoncini cures cancer with sodium bicarb? It's only a fungus!

[ponderingturtle]

Well then, I think we can safely conclude that mr simoncini is not only a charlatan but a total idiot as well.

Possibly, or possibly he just doesn't care who he hurts or kills as long as he makes money.

 

[JennyJo]

Possibly, or possibly he just doesn't care who he hurts or kills as long as he makes money.

I never want to believe people can be like that, because it makes the world such an ugly place. But I know there are lots of them, sadly, and it's very likely simoncini is one of them too.

 

[Phytotherapist]

The BUSINESS OF PROMISED MIRACLES THAT NEVER HAPPENED is very lucrative and Simoncini knows it very well. Although he killed many people, I'm not allowed to call him a criminal untill he is condemned by an Italian court.

I argued with one of his followers that insisted in saying dissolution and solutions have the same meaning (in Italian). I replied to him: dissolution means putting you (and Simoncini) in a tub full of acid. The solution, on the other hand, would be to put all the people like Simoncini and you in the acid.

 

[JennyJo]

The BUSINESS OF PROMISED MIRACLES THAT NEVER HAPPENED is very lucrative and Simoncini knows it very well. Although he killed many people, I'm not allowed to call him a criminal untill he is condemned by an Italian court.

A collegue of mine teaches Italian at the university where I work as well. She has translated the legal documents concerning Simoncini's convictions for the dutch anti-quackery organisation.
He was convicted for involuntary manslaughter and for fraud. He appealed and lost again. This was in 2006. His lawyer is now trying to present the case to the European Court.
And his license to practise medicine has been withdrawn.

I argued with one of his followers that insisted in saying dissolution and solutions have the same meaning (in Italian). I replied to him: dissolution means putting you (and Simoncini) in a tub full of acid. The solution, on the other hand, would be to put all the people like Simoncini and you in the acid.

This is hilarious!

 

[jli]

I'm not allowed to call him a criminal untill he is condemned by an Italian court.

Thats not fair. If he is allowed to speak out his rubbish under the rights of freedom of speech, so should you be allowed to speak out your opinion on his conduct.

 

[ddt]

Thats not fair. If he is allowed to speak out his rubbish under the rights of freedom of speech, so should you be allowed to speak out your opinion on his conduct.

Ahem. Calling someone a criminal - or more specifically, a murderer - is defamation and is forbidden in most jurisdictions.

However, once he has been convicted you can plaster the whole intarwubs full with sites saying he's a criminal.

 

[jli]

Ahem. Calling someone a criminal - or more specifically, a murderer - is defamation and is forbidden in most jurisdictions.

However, once he has been convicted you can plaster the whole intarwubs full with sites saying he's a criminal.

Well we could use some other words then. We could call im "a guy who practices medicine without a licence - and sometimes with lethal outcome".

 

[JennyJo]

Ahem. Calling someone a criminal - or more specifically, a murderer - is defamation and is forbidden in most jurisdictions.

However, once he has been convicted you can plaster the whole intarwubs full with sites saying he's a criminal.

Nog bedankt voor de link!
Translation: thanks for the link!

He was convicted - twice.
And: he is no longer a doctor.

 

[jli]

He was convicted - twice.

Yes but "only" for involuntary manslaughter. I wonder if this is considered a "real" criminal offense or simply a consequence of unfortunate incidents that shouldn´t have happened (A clumsy accident).

 

[godless dave]

I'm still trying to figure out why anyone thinks that sodium bicarb is an appropriate therapy, even if it WERE a fungus. I mean, it's not like you use baking soda to cure athlete's foot, do you?

If someone is ignorant enough to believe the statement that doctors don't know what cancer is, I doubt that person would even know what sodium bicarbonate is. It's enough that it has a fancy scientific-sounding name.

 

[godless dave]

Ahem. Calling someone a criminal - or more specifically, a murderer - is defamation and is forbidden in most jurisdictions.

Maybe most jurisdictions in the Netherlands or in Europe, but this discussion board is hosted in the US.

But it doesn't matter, someone already posted a link to his criminal convictions in Italy. Simoncini is a criminal.

 

[ddt]

Ahem. Calling someone a criminal - or more specifically, a murderer - is defamation and is forbidden in most jurisdictions.

Maybe most jurisdictions in the Netherlands or in Europe, but this discussion board is hosted in the US.

IANAL, but I'd be hard pressed to believe that you may defame someone in the US as a murderer. Maybe the prosecutor won't run very hard, but there'd be a hell of a tort suit.

But as Simoncini is based in Italy, or in the Netherlands at the moment, the chance he'll try to file suit in a US court is very very slim. And no-one has yet outright called him a murderer, only contemplated to do so. Of course, writing again "murderer" and "Simoncini" in one sentence will do good for the Google results.

But it doesn't matter, someone already posted a link to his criminal convictions in Italy. Simoncini is a criminal.

Yes, I'm a bit surprised that Phytotherapist said he couldn't call him a criminal, as he is already convicted. I don't know Italian law, but Dutch penal code explicitly says that reciting facts for which someone is convicted cannot constitute defamation.

What I guess from Phytoterapist's writings is that he isn't so much interested in plastering the web with English stories about Simoncini but rather with Italian ones.

So either he should keep to the facts for which S. was convicted, or post those stories in a jurisdiction where that's no problem, and preferably not under his own name, nor on a website for which he himself is registered. Simple as that.

 

[godless dave]

IANAL, but I'd be hard pressed to believe that you may defame someone in the US as a murderer. Maybe the prosecutor won't run very hard, but there'd be a hell of a tort suit.

A prosecutor couldn't do anything; defamation is always a civil tort in the US. IANAL, but I'm pretty confident a forum post saying "Simoncini is a murderer" or "George W. Bush is a murderer" (which I've probably written at least once on my blog) is not enough for a defamation suit. You have to reach a lot of people and the person defamed has to show harm.

People have called OJ Simpson a murderer on TV, and there's ******** he can do about it even though he was aquitted of murder in a court of law.

 

[Phytotherapist]

According to the Italian law I can call S. a criminal if he is convicted by the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione) and therefore, has no more right to appeal. It takes years to to get a sentence from that Court and therefore, many people like him get away with it. One example: In September 2004 an Italian "iridologist" has been sentenced by the Savona Court to a 10 years jail term after being found guilty of voluntary murder and abusive practice of Medicine.

It all started back in 1995 after an Italian women with a breast cancer contacted the "healer" after seeing an ad on a local tv in the hope of winning the battle against cancer. A few months later she died after expensive "alternative cures" "prescribed" by the "healer". The "iridologist" abused of her psycho-physic weakness and convinced her to avoid appropriate medical treatment which could have saved her life.
He is still free because he appealed and he'll go in jail when (and if) the Italian Supreme Court confirms this sentence (maybe in a few years). I would bet 10,000 EUR that he will never serve a single day.

On the other hand, I would risk if I say publicly that Italy is a country where criminals are protected by our Institutiuons (which is, in my opinion, the truth)

 

[ddt]

According to the Italian law I can call S. a criminal if he is convicted by the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione) and therefore, has no more right to appeal. [...]

He is still free because he appealed and he'll go in jail when (and if) the Italian Supreme Court confirms this sentence (maybe in a few years). I would bet 10,000 EUR that he will never serve a single day.

Okay, that clears it up. So the previous statement that he has been convicted was incomplete. A conviction isn't definitive until the term to file an appeal has passed. That's only logical. And yes, appeals procedures can last long. They should be carefully done.

On the other hand, I would risk if I say publicly that Italy is a country where criminals are protected by our Institutiuons (which is, in my opinion, the truth)

If this is the only thing you base that on, no. That's just decency of the law. How much I empathize with you and how much Simoncini is a piece of scum, we can't throw away the legal protections for that. Next you know the secret service trafficks in people it thinks may be terrorists.

(yes, that was a stab at the Italian secret service )

 

[JennyJo]

Yes but "only" for involuntary manslaughter. I wonder if this is considered a "real" criminal offense or simply a consequence of unfortunate incidents that shouldn´t have happened (A clumsy accident).

According to the legal documents, there were three casualties at his alternative clinic at the time. He worked there together with his brother Angelo. Only of one case of the three could be proven beyound doubt that it had been Tullio Simonincini himself administering the baking soda. This was a patient with colon cancer. During a badly performed colonoscopy, by means of which a solution of several litres of water with the baking soda was to be administered, the colon was ruptured and the patient died.

Tullio Simoncini was convicted for involuntary manslaughter and appealed. It is not clear if a hearing has taken place yet.

Also his license to practice medicine was withdrawn, to which he appealed as well. In 2006, he lost this appeal, so he is still not a docter any more.
The medical license of his brother Angelo was also withdrawn.

Tullio was also convicted of fraud, because of 'making unlawful promises that his therapy will cure cancer and doing so for money'.
To this he also appealed and lost.
His lawyer is now trying to start a procedure to get this conviction revoked before the European court. It is not clear yet whether there are sufficient grounds for such an appeal.

 

[JennyJo]

BTW, nothing has been heard of since from brother Angelo.

 

[Phytotherapist]

Tullio Simoncini was convicted 4 years, his (first) appeal is still pending and I don't think it'll be over in less than 5 or 6 years. Then, if he loses, he can still appeal to the Supreme Court which will take at least another 5-10 years.

His brother Angelo is still a registered doctor. You can find the names of all the doctors practising in Italy: http//application.fnomceo.it/Fnomce/public/ricercaProfessionisti.ot

 

[Phytotherapist]

Sorry, http//application.fnomceo.it/Fnomceo/public/ricercaProfessionisti.ot

 

[JennyJo]

Tullio Simoncini was convicted 4 years, his (first) appeal is still pending and I don't think it'll be over in less than 5 or 6 years. Then, if he loses, he can still appeal to the Supreme Court which will take at least another 5-10 years.

His brother Angelo is still a registered doctor. You can find the names of all the doctors practising in Italy: http//application.fnomceo.it/Fnomce/public/ricercaProfessionisti.ot

Do you mean he was convicted to 4 years or 4 years ago?

I did not know that about his brother, the last I read was that he had is license withdrawn als well. But apparently they no longer work together, you never hear anything about Angelo Simoncini.

Anyway, I would never let myself be treated by mr Tullio.

 

[jli]

the last I read was that he had is license withdrawn als well.

Could it be a temporary suspension only?

you never hear anything about Angelo Simoncini.

Hopefully he doesn´t get anywhere near cancer patients.

 

[JennyJo]

Could it be a temporary suspension only?

Hopefully he doesn´t get anywhere near cancer patients.

Perhaps it is a temporary suspension, I should have to ask my friend at university (she has scans of all the original legal documents). The dutch anti-quackery organisation is preparing a law suit against Tullio S.
Tullio filed an appeal against the withdrawal of his license, which he lost.

I should go and read an uplifting book now, this quackery business is so depressing.

 

[paximperium]

I should go and read an uplifting book now, this quackery business is so depressing.

Imagine how we feel in the US with Insurance that pays for Accupuncturists, Homeopaths, Chiropracters and now LICENSED NATUROPATHs...the sky is falling.

 

[JennyJo]

Imagine how we feel in the US with Insurance that pays for Accupuncturists, Homeopaths, Chiropracters and now LICENSED NATUROPATHs...the sky is falling.

We have this in the Netherlands as well, but only when you pay extra premium, which of course I don't!!! I absolutely refuse to pay even one penny for this nonsense.
Luckily the really important therapies, e.g. all available regular therapies for cancer, are all covered 100% in the cheapest insurance package available. This is the basic, standard package that all health insurers must provide by law.

 

[JennyJo]

@ Paximperium,

You have a beautiful name btw, and a beautiful avatar as well.

 

[jli]

Imagine how we feel in the US with Insurance that pays for Accupuncturists, Homeopaths, Chiropracters and now LICENSED NATUROPATHs...the sky is falling.

We will probably see that in Europe as well in the near future. We have recieved "suggestions" from the politicians to collaborate with the complementary guys. In Denmark the health system is mainly public - financed by the taxpayers, so it does matter what the politicians dream up.

 

[paximperium]

@ Paximperium,

You have a beautiful name btw, and a beautiful avatar as well.

Thanks. Wish I could say it was for a great reason. I actually picked it as an insult to 9/11 and NWO conspiracy theorist. I believe it really should be Pax Imperia ie. "Imperial Peace" but Imperium sounds way cooler.

The avatar is Aesclepius, Greek god of medicine with his staff with the coiled snake that is the original symbol for physicians but for some reason people started using the Caduceus, the Staff of Hermes as a symbol instead...go figure.

 

[JennyJo]

We will probably see that in Europe as well in the near future. We have recieved "suggestions" from the politicians to collaborate with the complementary guys. In Denmark the health system is mainly public - financed by the taxpayers, so it does matter what the politicians dream up.

It's just about everywhere it seems, in the UK as well I read, some kind of Prince Charles-fund. HRH is very holistic and what not.
I think it's embarrassing and it makes me feel like we're going back in time. Also, by funding these things you implicitly say that they are on the same level as regular science, which in my opinion they are absolutely not.

Oh well, my grandmother used to say that many people have brains only to prevent their heads from imploding.

 

[JennyJo]

I believe it really should be Pax Imperia.

Yes.

But hardly anyone will notice.
The movie Spartacus, with Russell Crowe, was full of faulty Latin and other curious mistakes, but (almost) no one noticed.

(...) for some reason people started using the Caduceus, the Staff of Hermes as a symbol instead...go figure.

Hm, the negotiator - I didn't know they started using his staff, this is a very educational forum indeed!

But the caduceus also symbolises peace, so in that respect that would have been appropiate as well.

 

[jli]

It's just about everywhere it seems, in the UK as well I read, some kind of Prince Charles-fund. HRH is very holistic and what not.
I think it's embarrassing and it makes me feel like we're going back in time. Also, by funding these things you implicitly say that they are on the same level as regular science, which in my opinion they are absolutely not.

They are good at getting good PR. I guess the PR thing is somewhat harder for regular medicine practitioners. Journalists won´t talk to pathologists unless it has to do with autopsies. The surgeons sometimes get attention when a celebrity has an operation, and occasionally some new oncologic treatment hits the headline as the "magic bullet" to terminate all cancers. And when was the last time an internal medicinist (Dont know the correct english term ) or a radiologist got headlines? In my opinion the press doesn´t give the advances in modern cancer treatment the atttention it deserves. It is hard to sell the message to the public that the combination of better radiology, better oncology, better surgery and better pathology actually improves outcome far beyond what many of us thought was realistic a few years back.

 

[JennyJo]

It is hard to sell the message to the public that the combination of better radiology, better oncology, better surgery and better pathology actually improves outcome far beyond what many of us thought was realistic a few years back.

You're absolutely right about that. I was talking to someone the other day about the advancements in oncology and giving some striking examples, but the only thing she said was: yes, maybe so, but you still need surgery and radiation and chemotherapy. They just don't want to hear the scary words. Also, I often feel that there is very little love or even sympathy for scientific labour among the general public.
They admire someone because he talks of 'holistic', and 'treating the whole person', and 'gentle therapies with no side effects'. The quacks have an easy message that many people love to hear, so it's easy for them to generate good pr too.
It's sad, but what can you do?

 

[ponderingturtle]

If this is the only thing you base that on, no. That's just decency of the law. How much I empathize with you and how much Simoncini is a piece of scum, we can't throw away the legal protections for that. Next you know the secret service trafficks in people it thinks may be terrorists.

I have to disagree with this. Taking 15 years to resolve a ciminal case is way to long, for everyone.

Go with the addage, justice delayed is justice denied.

 

[ddt]

I have to disagree with this. Taking 15 years to resolve a ciminal case is way to long, for everyone.

Go with the addage, justice delayed is justice denied.

At the time I wrote that, I had the impression this was about a 5 years period. Don't know why. But that seems a quite reasonable timeframe, at least from committing the crime to the appeals procedure at the Supreme Court.

15 years to resolve it is indeed way too long, I agree.

 

[jli]

Also, I often feel that there is very little love or even sympathy for scientific labour among the general public.

Fortunately many (most) patients are interested in participating in scientific protocols. Even if the present standard treatment is likely to be successful. Without that attitude we wouldn´t have come as far as we have.

 

[Phytotherapist]

JennyJo - on the 7th of Feb 2002 T. Simoncini injected SB on a 34 y. old male patient with an intestinal carcinoma (diagnosed as terminal by other oncologists)which perforated his intestine and died the day after. Moreover he treated 2 other women which died in the same year. On May 2006 he was convicted to 3 y. for manslaughter of the first patient and 16 months for having charged 7.500 EUR each to the other 2 patients. He brought to his defence about 20 of his patients claiming that their carcinomas have "disappeared" thanks to him. None of these patients were charged with false testimony.

The chances for him to get back his licence in Italy are the same as the USA becoming a communist country.

 

[JennyJo]

Fortunately many (most) patients are interested in participating in scientific protocols. Even if the present standard treatment is likely to be successful. Without that attitude we wouldn´t have come as far as we have.

Someone in the Netherlands wrote a thesis on this; it appears the attitude changes when people become patients themselves.

I was in a scientific protocol as well, as were many of my fellow patients.

Many people have talked to me about how breast cancer patients become 'deformed' by their surgery, how 'degrading', 'inhuman' and 'humiliating' it is having to undergo 'the torture' of chemotherapy and the 'nightmare' of losing your hair. They thought I would have cried a lot because of it, but in fact I didn't cry at all, which surprised them no end.
A woman once said to me she felt very sorry for me because I was now 'mutilated'. I felt like slapping her. I don't feel mutilated and I hate people calling me that.
But none of these people had ever been patients. The funny thing is that most patients don't talk to each other in this way at all.

 

[JennyJo]

on the 7th of Feb 2002 T. Simoncini injected SB on a 34 y. old male patient with an intestinal carcinoma (diagnosed as terminal by other oncologists)which perforated his intestine and died the day after. Moreover he treated 2 other women which died in the same year. On May 2006 he was convicted to 3 y. for manslaughter of the first patient and 16 months for having charged 7.500 EUR each to the other 2 patients. He brought to his defence about 20 of his patients claiming that their carcinomas have "disappeared" thanks to him. None of these patients were charged with false testimony.

That sounds truly horrible. On the internet there are video's of people claiming to be cured ty the great doctor. In one of them there is a man with spots on his head which is supposed to be melonoma. Simoncini treats melanoma with iodine, it is applied on the cancers, and lo and behold, after two or three weeks: gone was the melanoma.
The only thing the video proves is that the man was alive when he was filmed.

The chances for him to get back his licence in Italy are the same as the USA becoming a communist country

Well, that's a comfort of some sort.

What I don't understand though, was he not in prison? Or was he set free pending his appeal? Three years is not very much but not very little either.

 

[Phytotherapist]

According to the Italian law a person can be jailed only when the Supreme Court confirms the sentence of the other (2) courts. The exceptions are only hard-core criminal that pose a public threat. Tullio Simoncini has not been jailed and will never be jailed even if the Supreme Court confirms the sentence because, in the meantime, the Prodi government approved an amnesty which allowed criminals to have a 3 or 4 year sentence discount. This amnesty was approved in 2006 after Simoncini was sentenced and therefore he can (and will) benefit from this amnesty.

 

[JennyJo]

Simoncini's followers in the Netherlands deny he was ever convicted for manslaughter, they say in was only for fraud because he used a non-registered therapy and that this was also the reason that his license was withdrawn.
They say it can't be that he was convicted because he has never been in prison, they say these things are made up by his opponents.
I read an article in the Corriere della Sera on his conviction, which was on the internet, but I can't get to the article now anymore.

May I ask you how you came by the facts you stated in your post?

Simoncini has quite a number of people turning to him in fear and despair. He also treats perfectly curable patients, which causes them to lose valuable time or may even kill them. And it costs them a lot of money that is completely wasted.

Fellow patients and myself feel we have to warn people against this man.

You have no idea what his followers have been calling us: vermin kreeping out of the dark, sewer rats, criminals, the worst liars ever, brainless idiots etc. They also accuse us of being paid by the pharmaceutical industry to put Simoncini in a bad light.

They show figures of cancer patients who died and then say: look, al these poor people were treated to death by regular oncology. And they could have been saved by Simoncini, but big pharma and big doctors won't have it.
In their world, no one dies of cancer, but only of regular therapy.

They flatly deny he has ever been convicted and demand we show them the legal documents. The terrible thing is that many people actually believe them. So any information you have for us is more than welcome.

 

[jli]

They flatly deny he has ever been convicted and demand we show them the legal documents. The terrible thing is that many people actually believe them. So any information you have for us is more than welcome.

My guess is that if you provide the documents, they are convinced that these are fabricated. People like that are fact resistant.