My idea is that cancer doesn’t depend on mysterious causes (genetic, immunological or auto immunological as the official oncology proposes, but it comes down from a simple fungal infection, whose destroying power in the deep tissues is actually under estimated.
The present work is based on the conviction, supported by many years of observations, comparisons and experiences, that the necessary and sufficient cause of the tumour is to be sought in the vast world of the fungi, the most adaptable, aggressive and evolved micro-organisms known in nature.
I have tried many times to explain this theory to leading institutions involved in cancer issues (the Ministry of Health, the Italian Medical Oncological Association, etc.) elaborating on my thinking, but I have been brushed aside because of the impossibility of setting my idea in a conventional context.
A different, international audience represents the possibility of sharing a view about health, which differs, from what is widely accepted by today’s medical community, either officially or from the sidelines.
There is an opposition between the allopathic and the Hippocratic medical ideal. The former has the disadvantage of its inability to consider the individual as a whole. Therefore it brings with it all the distortions and aberrations which such a point of view entails (excessive specialisation, therapeutic aggressiveness, superficiality, harmfulness etc.). The latter approach instead tends in the direction of being too generic, non-scientific, and devoid of therapeutic incisiveness.
The position that I promote represents instead a meeting point of these two conceptions of health, since, from the conceptual point of view, it sublimates and adds value to both, while highlighting how they both are victims of a common conformist language.
The hypothesis of a fungal aetiology in chronic-degenerative illness, able to connect the ethical qualities of the individual with the development of specific pathologies, reconciles the two orientations (allopathic and holistic) of medicine. The hypothesis is a strong candidate for being that missing element of psychosomatics that has been sought but never found by one of the fathers of psychosomatics, Wiktor Von Weiszäcker.
In considering the biological dimensions of the fungi, for instance, it is possible to compare the different degrees of pathogenicity in relation to the condition of organs, tissues and cells of a guest organism, which in turn also and especially depend on the behaviour of the individual.
Each time the recuperative abilities of a known psycho-physic structure are exceeded, there is an inevitable exposure, even considering possible accidental cofounders, to the aggression — even at the smallest dimensions — of those external agents that otherwise would be harmless.
In the presence of an indubitable connection between patient morale and disease it is no longer legitimate to separate the two domains (allopathic and naturopathic) which are both indispensable for improving the health of individuals.
The Platonic separation of the human mind from the human body, responsible for the present mechanistic and materialistic character of today’s medicine, is outdated. So is the pessimistic Kantian position concerning integration of the rational and emotional sides of man (“the starred sky above me, the moral law within me”), which generates the present myopia of today’s medical epistemology. With such outdated cognitive frameworks inevitably come all the mindsets that carry similar restrictive and limiting presuppositions.