Baking Soda is known for its endless uses around the house. It’s used as a remedy for heart burn, an effective cleaner, and even an amazing odor controller, just to name a few. And these are not even scratching the surface. But can baking soda also be an effective Cancer treatment as well? That’s the real question.
Baking soda already solves just about every household issue imaginable, so why not add Cancer Cure to the list? Baking soda already seems to have magical powers. I mean it has over 100 practical uses already. With that extensive resume, it would be pretty easy to just add more things to the list. It fits the bill perfectly actually. It’s really cheap, non-toxic, and just about everyone already has it at home. Why not try it right? It’s almost too easy. And by looking at it quickly, it virtually has no risk.
Trying baking soda probably won’t kill you. But the risk is not in baking soda causing harm, it’s wasting time on something that might be pointless. That’s the risk. And if you ask me, that’s a huge risk. Time is super valuable when battling cancer.
The internet doesn’t make it any easier. With literally thousands of websites promoting the baking soda cancer cure, it’s hard to find a second opinion. Whether its baking soda alone or mixed with molasses, the message is the same. According to them, baking soda cures cancer.
Cancer Patients Are lied to.
These sites do just that, twist information to make it sound exactly how they want. They are masters of half truths, twisted lies, and fictional proof that makes no sense. But they put it in a package that’s so properly disguised and sugar coated, it’s hard to spot the rotten apple. Innocent cancer patients, which are the entire reader base for articles like this, have even more of a difficult time seeing the truth. Understandably, cancer patients want to find something that helps them so desperately, believing hype is a common trap they fall into.
Animal Studies vs Human Cancer Studies.
For example, one site I came across when doing my research was using animal cancer studies that used baking soda as a way to prove it was a Cancer cure for humans. As we all know, animal studies do not for the most part translate into human results. Of course, they didn’t bother to mention that this was only an animal study so humans should not expect the same results. They did the complete opposite. They based the entire article on that study to support the Cancer Cure claim. Comparing an animal study to a human study, is like comparing a bicycle to a car. Both might have wheels, but lets not get crazy here.
| Baking Soda Mouse Study. |
Human Cancer Studies Not Understood.
Another website used a baking soda study that received a 2 million dollar NIH grant to research the effects of baking soda on Breast Cancer. They used this study to make its cancer cure claim more credible. But once again, information was twisted because the study is using baking soda as a way to increase effectiveness of chemotherapy drugs and a way to reduce metastases. The study is not using Baking Soda as a sole treatment for Cancer, like the author wants you to think. A simple play on words and the entire article can be easily camouflaged. Yet another false cancer cure claim.
| Baking Soda Grant. |
Cancer Doctor Without Clinical Trials.
Another popular claim comes from a doctor in Italy named Dr. Tullio. Allegedly he has the ability to treat cancer by directly injecting a Baking soda solution into the tumor itself. The issue with this treatment is no real poof can be found to support his claims. No human trials have ever been done. We only have the word of the doctor himself and the world famous testimonials. None of these are proof. And they shouldn’t be enough to gamble your life on. We all would love this to be true, but we have to remember to look at the facts and not be blinded by our feelings. Picking this treatment over another can be a life changing decision, so treat it like one. Don’t let your emotions get the best of you. If at the end of your research you still feel like giving it a try, that’s fine, but don’t just try it cause you heard it worked for someone else.
| Dr. Tullio Simoncini. |
Human Cancer Studies Are Most Important.
Usually I only consider an alternative cancer treatment having merit if it has 2 things. A lot of research and a human study that shows positive results. A human study that shows a positive effect is the most important piece of information in my opinion. I searched for any type of human baking soda cancer study, but found nothing. So really the only thing left to do, is wait for more data.
Baking Soda Cancer Facts Come Up Empty.
From the data available so far, we can’t say for sure what effect oral baking soda has on human Cancer. If we said anything, it would be purely guessing at best. It might be proven in the future that it can inhibit metastases, but we are still awaiting results even for that. So of course, when looking at the facts, things don’t add up. In fact, with current research, my position is completely opposite to all the other questionable websites. Facts are what matter, and that’s one thing fraudulent websites just don’t have.
I hope by writing this article I can save someone the time from making a costly mistake. If you have any questions about the baking soda treatment or have personal experiences, please leave a comment below.
Sources:
Related Articles
13 Comments
-
Thanks for the info. I fell into their trap of half information and wasted my time on hopes instead of finding something that is proven to work and have results in humans by itself
-
Author
You are very welcome Christopher. I created this website so that people will have access to the truth and not waste time on myths or hype. I hope that this site can save people time and give them valuable cancer information. If I can just save one person from a bad mistake, I have done my job.
-
Can I ask you what your opinion of the budwig diet is and Essiac tea. We have colon cancer and lung cancer in the family. I’ve used this on my father who had throat cancer and our pet german shorthair had tumors. We used flax oil and cottage cheese and also the Essiac tea that was made famous by Rene Caisse I believe. Also what about cell food drops? I’ve been taking them for over 2 years now. I have lynch disease and precancerous polyps on colon. Thank you joseph lenart
-
Joseph,
I will be writing an article about each of the cancer treatments you mentioned. So keep an eye out. Until then, using natural treatments that have been tested in human studies is preferable to untested natural treatments. For example, Essiac tea has been tested in humans but the results have been mixed at best. The other negative about Essiac tea is the uncertainty of ingredients originally used by Rene M. Caisse herself. Unfortunately, most natural treatments that do get tested disappoint in studies.
Things like cell food drops have no real human studies that I am aware of so the effect it has on humans is unknown. Increase your odds by sticking to evidence based natural treatments. Taking anything that hasn’t been tested in humans can be a waste of time and risky.
Thank you for your questions
-
Supporter of Big Pharma. I don’t believe a word on this site.
-
wow Jerry Skyles, it is clear you have not read anything on this web site. I have family with cancer and everyone is trying to sell just about any type of snake oil cure you can think of. I have spent many years researching and this site actually is not trying to sell or make profit off of any gimmicks or fake cancer cures like many other websites do. I support and recommend this site to anyone who wants to read real information that is at this time factual and evidence based. This site definitely does not support Big Pharma in my opinion.
-
Jerry,
Cancermind is not a supporter of big pharma, but rather a supporter of research and reliable data that can show whether any treatment, conventional or natural, has the potential of helping cancer patients. No favoritism is used on treatments produced in a lab or grown on a tree. The battle I fight is not big pharma vs natural treatments, but against cancer as a whole.
-
-
sodium bicarbonate raises ph around tumors and stops metastasis. I know people which it helps. I know a man who is 98 years old and has been drinking soda bicarbonate his whole life. Is it only one way of modern medicine (chemotherapy) proven to work? 5 years survival rate is 2.3%. So what is proven then?
-
Ralal,
Just because you know someone that’s been drinking baking soda all his life does not prove that it is an effective cancer treatment. We all know people who have done many things for the entirety of their life, so does that mean all those things are effective cancer treatments? How about smoking cigarettes for 80 years? Is that a cancer treatment? Does someone smoking for 80 years prove that cigarettes don’t contain carcinogens that cause cancer? This way of thinking is unfortunately flawed.
This article clearly states that baking soda is currently being tested for reducing cancer metastases. Reducing or even preventing metastases is not the same as a cancer cure. Please read the article clearly since it provides credible data and points out the confusion on existing baking soda cancer studies.
-
-
This is interesting literature too and recently I am looking into the research of Taheebo which there is very strong Canadian research behind it indicating it is a potent anti cancerous agent. The research also included that in the rain forest trees surrounding Taheebo trees grew fungus which destroyed the trees however the fungus could not grow nor survive on Taheebo trees. Take a few minutes to read up on Taheebo bark when you have a chance. Chemo did not work for a friend of mine, but I never wanted to give up trying to spotlight anything I could find with integral research attached to it.
-
Jason,
Thanks so much for your comment. I am slightly aware of this treatment but recognize it more for its other name Pau d’Arco. Now that you have mentioned it I will definitely take a deeper look.
-
-
Lots of Shills and Psyops. Of course it’s going to be blasted as being pointless. You’re offered 3 choices by your ‘professional’ medical practitioners, Chemotherapy, Radiation therapy, and surgery. All of those cost big bucks versus the cheap $3.00 cure, and the first 2 can even give you cancer.
Think about it… who has more to lose (or gain), the person telling you it works who doesn’t even sell baking soda (and the minimal profit if they did), or Big Pharma losing BILLIONS per year? Why would people post that it works? They aren’t being paid by the baking soda industry. But you can bet Big Pharma would shell out thousands of dollars to Shills and Psyops who will tell you it doesn’t work, just so the gravy train doesn’t stop for them.
I personally have witnessed a so called controversial cure work on 3 stage 4 cancer victims, and their doctors could not explain it. One was in her late 80’s.
-
Why would people post that something works if it really didn’t? Maybe because they truly believe it did. But that doesn’t make it accurate. It doesn’t have to be about money. We would all want baking soda to be a cure for cancer. It would be the best solution to the problem. The cost is as low as it can be. It’s available to everyone and extremely easy to use. Can’t get any better than baking soda. Almost sounds to good to be true.
The question why would someone post that baking soda works if it really didn’t is irrelevant. Why do people eat tide pods? Why do people look for trouble? Why do people lie? Why do people hurt other people? They just do. Some do it just to get their rocks off. Some do it because they lack the intelligence to know better. Some are just crazy. That’s the world we live in. You don’t know who wrote the testimonial so you shouldn’t treat it as evidence. If some guy on the street is running in a cape and calls himself superman, are you going to believe him? He might really think he’s superman. But does that make it true?
And even if the testimonial is genuine that doesn’t mean it’s accurate. In order to know that baking soda was the true “cancer cure” many things need to be taken into account which normally doesn’t happen. Was baking soda the only treatment they were on? If they took anything else the claim is invalid. And i for one don’t know anyone that is trying to treat cancer naturally that doesn’t try multiple natural treatments at the same time. They usually even mention all the natural treatments they tried in the testimonial but usually give only one the credit. Interesting.
Then you have inaccurate use of the word cure. If baking soda did in fact have benefit it would be called a response. Big difference. A cure means that we have won the war on cancer and that anyone who takes baking soda can be effectively treated and the cancer controlled indefinitely. That is definitely not the case because i know many real cancer patients that baking soda did not work for. I repeat, it did not work. The issue is you only hear about the good results but never bad. If baking soda didn’t work then either the patient is dead and can’t talk about it or they are still alive but no one is going to talk about something that didn’t work. It’s not front page news and it’s just not going to come up in normal conversation as would if the treatment really did help. If something works you feel you have to tell the world but if something doesn’t the same motivation isn’t there.
Even if baking soda worked for some people, we don’t know if it works 1 out of 100 times or 1 out of 10,000 times. Even if it was 1 out of 10 which is pretty much impossible it still can’t be considered a cure. So the entire idea people have about drinking baking soda or other natural treatments are wrong to assume they are cures. It doesn’t mean they can’t be effective but cure is the wrong word to use.
So yes it’s very easy to see that most testimonials can have a very high risk of inaccuracy. So much so they shouldn’t be used at all when making any health related decisions.
-
