Banned B-17 and Cancer

Since cancer runs in both sides of my family, I am interested in preventing it.

I know there are many posts from folks who claim they have found a cure, from onions to magnets, but I think I have found something to note - B-17.

I originally started looking at places around the globe and found a few interesting facts. I forget where (sorry), but I read of a village (and saw the same one on the Discovery channel) where there were no reported cases of cancer. Their main food - apricots.

They used the whole fruit too - including grinding the seed/pit into a flour which they consumed as well. It was discovered that the pit was high in B-17.

I found B-17 being present in several foods, such as flax seed, bitter almonds (not regular almonds), fava beans, bamboo sprouts, apple seeds, pear seeds, plum seeds, prune seeds, cherry seeds, wild blackberries, just to name a few.

I've read of some clinics in Mexico having some success in preventing and curing some early forms of cancer with B-17.

I wondered why there were no B-17 suppliments at the drug stores.

Interestingly, apricot seeds (which has the most B-17) were outlawed by the FDA at one time, along with bitter almonds and others. Seems also that B-17 vitamins became illegal. I have read that these are once again legal, but they are still banned.

There are many claims that enough B-17 digested will prevent most forms of cancer. However, The FDA banned Vitamin B17 years ago. Actually in the 1980's when World Without Cancer was published. Although it is banned, it is not illegal.


home.bluegrass.net...

"What it means is that ~ If any hospital uses laetrile the law says that they jeopardize any grants from the government as well as any money from Medicaid and other hospital insurance originating from the government. Since nearly all of hospital revenues come from patient insurance, not one hospital in the U.S. will take the chance and use any banned substance including, Amygdalin ( also called Vitamin B17 and Laetrile )."

Why was B-17 banned by the FDA? Why was the bitter almond tree banned from the US? Why can't you get raw apricot seeds anymore?

*************************************

I am not saying that I have found a cure for cancer, but I would like to bring this up for an intelligent debate. Out of all the things I have researched in cancers it seems B-17 has the most potential.

Please, let us not discuss our theories on what does cure/prevent cancer in this thread, but discuss B-17 and its effectiveness on cancer cure/prevention. Is it fact or fiction?

I've seen that about apricot pits too. Further proof that FDA is really there to keep us just sick enough to spend on health problems, but keep working to keep taxes flowing.

I think you might be on to something.

Is B-17 supposed to be bad for you or something?
What was the reason behind banning it?
And bitter almond trees? and Apricot pits? WTF Are they poison or something?

There has to be a "reason" the FDA made it illegal (now banned), wether reasonable or not.
We should find out what that reason is exactly.
If it is reasonable then so be it, but if it is nebulous, or cryptic, then there just might be something up.

I have a couple friends that died from cancer, so this is an issue close to me.

Nice work finding this!

From what I was able to gather, "When Laetrile comes in contact with the enzyme beta-glucosidase, the Laetrile is broken down to form two molecules of glucose, one molecule of benzaldehyde and one molecule of hydrogen cyanide (HCN)."

www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk...

Their arguement is that Laetrile has 1 molecule of cyanide and supposedly one can be harmed by taking in too much.

However:

"The cyanide is released only when cancerous cells are recognised by their high glucosidase content. B17 cyanide attacks cancer cells specifically. No large amounts of glucosidase detected means no cyanide release. Rest assured, there is no evidence that vitamin B17 can kill, unless of course, one is accidentally crushed under a pallet of the stuff!"

www.cancertutor.com...

I was unable to confirm any deaths from eating too much of foods high in B-17. The closest I came was on the same page as the above link:

"…I was lecturing in Buffalo, New York and...after I had made some strong statements - a man stood up and said "Dr. Manner, how in the world can you make statements like that when the FDA is making these other statements?" I reiterated that the FDA statements were lies. 'He said, "Look at this little girl in upstate New York, she took her father's Laetrile tablets and died of cyanide poisoning." Just then a little lady stood up: "Dr. Manner let me answer that question. I think I am entitled to because I am that little baby's mother. That baby never touched her father's Laetrile tablets. The doctor, knowing the father was on Laetrile, marked down "possible cyanide poisoning". At the hospital they used a cyanide antidote and it was the antidote that killed the child. And yet that statement will continue to appear even though they know it is a lie."

There is much more one can find on the web and in books.

I still am trying to find why bitter almond trees are banned in the US - is it related to the B-17? It is said that it is the cyanide in them that makes them poisonous. However, some of the other holders of B-17 have cyanide in them.

Supposedly, the cyanide is not released unless a cancer cell is found and that is what might fight the cancer.




[edit on 30-3-2006 by godservant]

"B-17" is NOT a vitamin in any way, shape or form. It is laetrile, and can be quite toxic. Used properly, you may be correct and may indeed have efficacy against some cancers.

If you guys are interested in understanding the mechanisms of cancer and cancer cures, you should do yourselves a favor and read some actual research. It is tiresome to see posted links for all this hokum research. Real research is published in peer-reviewed journals, not on personal and business websites.

For example...

Also

This is not definitive evidence that laetrile has no indication for cancer treatment, just further information to alert you to your dangerous oversimplification of cancer cell physiology:

From your link: "The cyanide is released only when cancerous cells are recognised by their high glucosidase content. B17 cyanide attacks cancer cells specifically. No large amounts of glucosidase detected means no cyanide release. Rest assured, there is no evidence that vitamin B17 can kill, unless of course, one is accidentally crushed under a pallet of the stuff!"

Hokum!!! For example

Intestinal microflora can possess high glucosidase activity and liberate cyanide from laetrile.

Human intestinal mucosal cells have high glucosidase activity.

Please show me some published research that suggests that cancer cells are uniquely marked by high glucosidase activity. Good luck, cancer is not that simple. Do you see how you make it easy for yourself to believe sensational claims when you believe the overly simplified and unsubstantiated claims made by alternative medicine practicioners? I am not attempting to debunk alternative medicine, but I urge you to read A LOT more and don't beleive sensational statements without verification.

metatronic

[edit on 30-3-2006 by metatronic]

[edit on 30-3-2006 by metatronic]

I do not believe everything I read. I have also read some of what you've shown in the past as well.

Moderation is true with everything.

However, there are places where the seeds are eaten of fruits, such as apricots and is a main source of food, and most cancers are unrecorded or rare. Of course, unrecorded doesn't mean non-existent, but if it is low enough to not be recorded, it is still low enough to look into why.

Also, alternative medicine in this area often state to begin doses small and work up to a certain amount to prevent too much change to the body.

As with anything, too much is bad.

I appriciate your concern, but I am still not convinced. I don't jump on a passing bandwagon, I do alot of research and reading. However, I can learn more.

How do you explain the absense or very rate of most forms of cancer in some area's of the world? Those area's usually don't have published research papers. What does 'published' really mean anyways? Unpublished doesn't mean wrong. Would a large pharm company say "Hey, we found a cure for many forms of cancer, just eat 6-9 apricot seeds a day. No need to take our expensive drugs anymore."?

Sometimes 'statistics' hold more clout with me than 'published'.

Most, if not all B's are not really vitamins, but it has kept it's nickname from before anyone knew better. And yes, too much B-17 can be deadly, but so can too much many things.

We see B-17 go down in western cullture diet, and many forms of cancer rise. B-17 was helped in it's decline in our diet.

I tend to oversimplify when I write, sorry, but I don't expect anyone to take my word for it. I'd hope anyone would look for themselves.

For or against B-17, please continue to debate this.

[edit on 30-3-2006 by godservant]

I am in the same situaton, my dad had testicle cancer, luckily removed, 1 left, and doing fine. My uncle had troath cancer, and died from it. This week a friend died from brain cancer, the father of my best friend too a year ago. The only they did is chemo and cutting, never worked except for my father. I don not believe in traditional cures fro cancer, cause they are not working well.
So I urge people to look for alternatives, and there are, but they were banned in the US for exemple, think about hoxsey.
I think we shoud do some more research on B17, hoxsey, herbs, electro magnetic treatments etc.... I think these could be the solution, nt for all cancers and certainly not in terminal phases. Traditional medicines have spent billions in research and are not advancing, expensive not working cures, for the rest chemo and cutting. Cutting is in very few cases (as my father's) a solution but it can allways come back, and chemo is trying to kill the cancer, but it often kill the patient too.

I strongly believe we still have too invest in both ways , traditional and alternative. But with a bigger focus for alternative because they were under-researched and some times banned or labelled as charlatanism.

Concerning some ergions in the world that have less cancers, I think about teh mediteranean see, they have it much less. They speak about the food in many cases, eat more olive oil, indeed apricots (they are so taste full when I go on hollidays there, my father lives there), but also brocoli and many other vegetables and fruits.

The best way to combat cancer is prevention, cause it is in many cases the way we live that creates this horrible disease. It's about the stress, the bad fast food we eat (US in 1st place), the polluted air we breath, the mono culture we live in, the drugs and alcohol we take, and the smoking,the permanent frequencies we live under (sattelites,tv,computer,cellulars...), the fact people are less conscious.

I do welcome any solution, you can mail me directly [email protected], I allmost sure I'll get it one time, knowing I smoke sinds my 14y, live under stress,working in a billing call center, spending 10hours a day behind a computer.... hope I'll have a healthier livign soon. But we al have to earn a living, otherwise it would be different. I would love to be on a sunny spot of the world living from nature and having good times with the people in general, enjoying love, truth and communication, oneness and uniqueness, everything in sync with our beautifull planet (we are messign up).

Time to wake up, time to change. The sheep are biginning to ask questions, and we are at the beginning of a new era in my opinion.

Excuse my english, keep the research on.

mod edit: removed drug references

[edit on 1-4-2006 by sanctum]

To further show that B-17, I will provide some links, even though half of what I have learned about this was not from the web. Included in the below links are research and practices done mostly by doctors.


A summary of the 20 successful case histories of long-term survivors using Binzel nutritional program:
www.brave-souls.com...


Cancer gone without chemo:
"My Mom was recently diagnosed as Stage IV rectal cancer and when Surgeon opened her for emergency Colostomy has said cancer spread to all female organs. Everyone here is so supportive so ask any questions and continue reading thru past posts. Mom's good friend had breast cancer 10 years ago and backed out of surgery. Went to Ohio or somewhere to meet with DR. who specialized in Laetrile and B17. She never had chemo or treatment and lives by this diet and supplements/juice and has no cancer as of today. The book she gave us is 'Alive and Well' by Philip E. Binzel, Jr., M.D., and the publisher is American Media PO Box 4646, Westlake Village, CA 91359. If you can't order from them check with Amazon.com maybe they can get it. Mom's friend says she eats mostly raw fruit and veggies and no red meat. I'm not sure how to get Laetrile, haven't gotten that far yet...let me know if you find out anything. Mom's going to go thru with her treatment and surgery but will do this for health to fight against chemo/radiation effects. Her friend eats the kernals out of the pits of all fruits like peach and apricots, she also eats the apple seeds and raspberries. She said they (kernals)are bitter but swears by this method. Good Luck and our prayers are with you!!"

from www.acscsn.org...


I found one of the cancer free villiages I was talking about - Hunza. I believe this is the one I saw years ago, because I remember that their wealth was measured by the number of apricot trees. This link shows them and other peoples around the world with low or no cancers.
More at www.northernarea.20m.com... and www.rawtimes.com...

The problem with relying on medical experts for a cancer cure is that they're spending their time and money on "studies" like, does prayer hurt or help. How could you control that study, let alone spend $2 million on it. We keep getting promised a cure is just around the corner, only to get around the corner and find cancer in more areas. Nope, I think it's up to us Joe Shmoes to get creative and come up with some solutions. It's amazing the amount of info available on the net. Just need to filter out the useful stuff. Glad to see the discussion about it.

As complex as cancer may truly be, it would be much easier to understand or possibly reveal a cure if many of the primary sources of cancer causing agents were not produced at the benefit of elected and appointed government officials.

The 'senior' governmental agency that is responsible for the FDA is The Committee on Energy and Commerce

In performing this historic function, the Committee has developed what is arguably the broadest (non-tax-oriented) jurisdiction of any Congressional committee. Today, it maintains principal responsibility for legislative oversight relating to telecommunications, consumer protection, food and drug safety, public health, air quality and environmental health, the supply and delivery of energy, and interstate and foreign commerce in general. This jurisdiction extends over five Cabinet-level departments and seven independent agencies--from the Energy Department, Health and Human Services, the Transportation Department to the Federal Trade Commission, Food and Drug Administration, and Federal Communications Commission—and sundry quasi-governmental organizations.

I'm sure it's unlikely but it might help to direct some of your questions concerning B-17 towards them. The acting chairman, Joe Barton might not be as corrupt and scandalous as the previous leader... en.wikipedia.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Billy Tauzin

On January 3, 2005, the same day he left Congress, Tauzin began work as the head of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, a powerful trade group for pharmaceutical companies. It was reported that they had offered more than a million dollars per year for his services, outbidding the MPAA (L.A. Times, 9 Feb. 2004). This created a dramatic perception of impropriety, for only two months earlier Tauzin had played a key role in shepherding the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill through Congress; the Bill was beneficial to PhRMA's members.

godservant, if you have found something that you believe will prevent you from getting cancer AND it is has been banned by the FDA then you should definitely pursue obtaining it... passionately!
What more proof do you need?

Honestly, I don't think you should waste your time reading through anymore pages of tainted research or the results of studies that are 'published' in the popular American/Science distributions. It's not as if you are likely to find results that prove that our government is conducting a deadly experiment on all of us. If you invest the time to compare the drugs they allow into our sources of food because our 'representatives' and their associates will profit from them, compared to the amount of potential cures they have banned or determined to have no medicinal use over the years....
you could wind up with a disease much worse than cancer.

Reading too much of this bovine excrement can rot an elephants brains!
The machine is on a mission and 'the people' are it's victims.
Finished business.

You are better off swimmin' with tha fishes!

It's some form of sophisticated chemotherapy, actually, so take it with a grain of salt and don't use it unless you have reason to, it's a treatment option, not necessarily a supplement.

Amygdalin / Laetrile / Vitamin B-17 breaks down into two toxic compounds (cyanide and benzaldehyde) by use of an enzyme which is rather rare in healthy tissue but present in quantities in cancer, thereby releasing the toxins exactly on-site so to speak. Furthermore, cancerous cells do not produce enzymes to digest the toxins, while normal cells do. This combination is rather desirable compared to most pharmaceutical chemotherapies, obviously.


www.alternativehealth.com.au...

..
Each molecule of Laetrile contains one unit of cyanide, one unit of benzaldehyde and two of glucose bound together tightly in a chemical bond. An enzyme called beta-glucosidase will break down the bonds holding these chemical units together, thus releasing the toxic chemicals hydrogen cyanide and benzaldehyde. This enzyme is present all over the body in small quantities but in larger quantities (upto 100 times more) at cancerous tumour sites.
..

www.b17galore.com...

If you orally injested a combination of three grams of B-17 combined with three grams of Aspartame and didn't die within an hour what would that mean?

I guess formaldehyde has a better street reputation than cyanide.
As if we would not be just as content to drink cyanide as we are formaldehyde.
Almost every diet beverage and product contains aspartame that converts into formaldehyde once in our body.
I guess it would be too much of a risk to attempt to cure a person of cancer with B-17, and the FDA isn't afraid to risk the consequences to our health when over 6000 consumable products in our food supply contains aspartame(formaldehyde).

Is it true that these people cannot be held accountable or charged with a crime for the choices they are making?

My husband noticed that they don't sell whole apricots at Wal-Mart...I need to check the grocery store too.

It's all about depopulation and money.

Godservant,
Please don't take my terms as 100%negative on the laetrile thing. There may be something there--especially with the anecdotal reports of cancer-free 'tribes' of people. Keep in mind though that 40-60% of cancer risk may be determined by your genes. Therefore finding isolated groups of people around the world who do not get cancer is not surprising. Other than the assertion by pro-laetrile websites, where is the evidence thet these people ingest significant ammounts of laetrile. You are right that for something to be valid, it doesn;t need to be published. Not published doesn;t mean "wrong" but publication o the interned certainly does not mean right. You must think more objectively if you are going to seek the truth in a sea of 'reports' anecdotes and testimonials on the internet or elsewhere. For example, living in the cold, moderate physical work (exercise), and diet of fresh, unprocessed foods, high in fruits and vegetables is an excellent way to fight cancer. This will keep cancer away, especially if the regimin is a lifelong one. You can't switch from a crap-diet and expect to cure cancer--of course. By the way, it is rather rare for pharmaceutical corps to publish research in scientific journals.

I am still irked at the coloquial utilization of the term "vitamin B17". Vitamins are nutritionally required micronutrients. No requirement has ever been established for laetrile. You said:
"Most, if not all B's are not really vitamins, but it has kept it's nickname from before anyone knew better."

Incorrect. In Humans the B vitamins are:
* Vitamin B-1 (Thiamine)
* Vitamin B-2 (Riboflavin)
* Vitamin B-3 (Niacin)
* Vitamin B-5 (Pantothenic acid)
* Vitamin B-6 (Pyridoxine and Pyridoxamine)
* Vitamin B-7 (Biotin)
* Vitamin B-9 (Folic acid)
* Vitamin B-12 (Cyanocobalamin)

They are all REQUIRED for proper biological function of humans (and most mammals). Other "B vitamins" are falsely named as such by those who hock them. Sorry, no offense meant--I am a biochemist.

Contentious:
Your knowledge of chemistry is lacking. Approximately 10% of aspartame is converted to methanol (50% degrading to the amino acid phenylalanine and 40% to the amino acid aspartic acid). The ammount of methanol produced by one diet beverage is less than that found in a shot of low quality liquor. Don't take me wrong. I won't touch the stuff myself. A far more sinister compound is formed in 'stale' diet drinks. After a couple months on the shelf, signigficant quantities of the aspartame can degrade to form diketopiperazines--very carcinogenic compounds. How does this relate to laetrile/amigdalyn anyhow?

I honestly believe in the efficacy of alternative medicine. But honestly, "The Cure for Cancer" is to live cleanly, eat little, eat fresh, work hard and limit envoronmental toxin exposure. Things like laetrile, ozone and colloidal silver DO have efficacy in certain cases of diseases. But all this uproar about the FDA breeding a conspiracy to supress "cures" is nothing but a fanatic panacea. There is no magic herb, pill or mineral to cure all cancer. The FDA liscenses drugs for the "treatment of cancer"--no cures!. It is (and should remain so) illegal to market a product that claims to cure cancer (or any other terminal disease). Think about it! How would you feel about me marketing a wholostic mineral clay, or mystical inca herb which "cured cancer" to your dying mother? The reason these alternative treatments are not lisenced by the FDA for such is that there is no on e who can pay for all the fees and trials required for such licensure. Where is the conspiracy in that? I am certainly not defending the FDA or Pharmaceutical corps, but just use logic. No big money--no trials--no fees-no license. Believe it or not, the FDA does not test anything--thats not their job, it's regulation. Testing and medical trials are paid for by private money. Who's going to do that for laetrile? No one. Fortunately, the information is out there and you are free to try laetrile on yourself.

metatronic

Originally posted by godservant\
I know there are many posts from folks who claim they have found a cure, from onions to magnets, but I think I have found something to note - B-17.

First of all, Metatronic's right -- it's not a vitamin. It's not required for life.

I originally started looking at places around the globe and found a few interesting facts. I forget where (sorry), but I read of a village (and saw the same one on the Discovery channel) where there were no reported cases of cancer. Their main food - apricots.

Bad science. The villagers tend to die at age 40-50 (and look very old, by the way). MOST cancers don't form in those younger than 50.
www.agingwell.state.ny.us...

They used the whole fruit too - including grinding the seed/pit into a flour which they consumed as well. It was discovered that the pit was high in B-17.

It's actually processed, which removes some of the cyanide. 1/20th of a gram of the oils is a lethal dose for the average sized human:
www.uni-graz.at...

I've read of some clinics in Mexico having some success in preventing and curing some early forms of cancer with B-17.

You should check their track record. Coretta Scott King, who died of cancer this year, used the clinics rather than standard medical treatment.
www.quackwatch.org...

Here's more on the track record.
www.cancer.gov...

I wondered why there were no B-17 suppliments at the drug stores.

Well, because it's not a vitamin and a fairly small dose will kill you. The case of Chad Green, a child, whose parents didn't want standard treatment for him and fled with him to Mexico for Laetrile treatments is a common story. Chad's "treatment" killed him.
www.acsh.org...

There are many claims that enough B-17 digested will prevent most forms of cancer.

This is true. If you're dead, you don't get cancer.

"What it means is that ~ If any hospital uses laetrile the law says that they jeopardize any grants from the government as well as any money from Medicaid and other hospital insurance originating from the government. Since nearly all of hospital revenues come from patient insurance, not one hospital in the U.S. will take the chance and use any banned substance including, Amygdalin ( also called Vitamin B17 and Laetrile )."

You're not going to find many MDs who are interested in this when there's many more effective treatments and there's a ton of studies showing that it's ineffective and dangerous.

Why was B-17 banned by the FDA?

Deaths, and quacks.

Why was the bitter almond tree banned from the US?

How about "it's a scare story put out by people who want to sell you on the Laetrile mythos." In fact, bitter almond is a root stock used for grafts here in the US:
www.hort.purdue.edu...

It's not banned.

Why can't you get raw apricot seeds anymore?

Actually, except for the quack market, you couldn't get them in the first place. They're bitter. However, you're certainly able to get apricots... they're just out of season right now. We have them in stores here in Texas all the time.

Of course, they grow here.

I am not saying that I have found a cure for cancer, but I would like to bring this up for an intelligent debate. Out of all the things I have researched in cancers it seems B-17 has the most potential.

Quackwatch and others have links to studies. Remember, when it first came out, doctors were VERY interested in this and wanted to see it proved out. But clinical tests (including by manufacturers interested in making the drug) showed that it was ineffedtive and dangerous.

Thank you very much for your input. You may be right and I may be wrong. However, most know how cancer has largely increased in recent decades. There MUST be a reason. Something changed, and I still believe it was mostly our diet that brought more cancer in.

Also Byrd, it is very difficult to do any real research these days as you've got BS artist, lies, profitable claims, truth and even things that seems true, but fools even the writer at times.

I know B-17 is not a vitiamin, but it has become its name. I am not a doctor or a nutritionist, but I am trying to find the difference between today and 100 years ago. The difference between our cancers and area's where cancers are MUCH less found. What I consistently find is diet.

In these area's where most cancers are missing or rare, sure, they might live 40-50 years, but that is not from cancer. They're mostly 3rd world countries where they don't have clean water, doctors, medicine and other things like we have.

You've posted a couple of links where folks died from Laetrile in an attempt to cure their cancer. Yes, it happens - you CAN overdose from it. However, there are a LOT more people (who aren't selling anything) claiming that Laetrile cured them.

I have known 2 people who have found their cancers disappear with only using alternative techniques. One was from Laetrile and the other I cannot say on these boards. I know alternative medicine works. It may not be 100%, but it is having more success than radiation and conventional medicine.

I was under the impression that Coretta Scott King died before receiving any treatment at the "alternative" clinic.

Also, as a side note: Peach pits also contain B-17, just in lower amounts. If you want to experiment with B-17 wouldn't it be better to start with smaller amounts? I used to eat them when I was younger, I kinda like them.
If I ever got cancer I wouldn't hesitate to start eating a few every day.

It is said that you should eat a small amount and move up slowly, and yes, peach pits are included in the b17 intake. Here is a list:

home.bluegrass.net...

Now for others who say b17 is poisonous, you'll see many familiar foods on that list - hmmm. Isn't that interesting.

Do your own research and you'll find that this has promise.

take care

Originally posted by godservant
Thank you very much for your input. You may be right and I may be wrong. However, most know how cancer has largely increased in recent decades. There MUST be a reason. Something changed, and I still believe it was mostly our diet that brought more cancer in.

What has changed is that we're living longer and diseases that used to kill us are now easily cured (typhus, diptheria, etc, etc.) So we see the ones that have no cures (yet) showing up.

Also Byrd, it is very difficult to do any real research these days as you've got BS artist, lies, profitable claims, truth and even things that seems true, but fools even the writer at times.

Remember the basics of science:
* are there numerous "double blind" studies out there on this?
* is the information accurate (there's no such thing as "vitamin B17" and when you look at the definition of vitamins, this becomes clear.)
* are the places offering information coincidentally SELLING the product?
* does the site/originator dismiss science as being hidebound/corrupt? (this usually means that his own processes don't hold up to basic science.)
* are there a lot of doctors/scientists supporting this? (if not then there's something fishy there. Even the most extreme concepts (asteroid wiping out dinosaurs) had supporters after the first announcement.)
* has this been around for a number of years? If it has been and it has gained no support, this is a sign that it's not good science. Even the real weird stuff gained support after it was tested by others and found to be true.

I know B-17 is not a vitiamin, but it has become its name.

I urge you to call it by its real name, laetrile... saying that it's a vitamin spreads disinformation.

I am not a doctor or a nutritionist, but I am trying to find the difference between today and 100 years ago. The difference between our cancers and area's where cancers are MUCH less found. What I consistently find is diet.

Uhm, look at the overall age of death and access to health care. Countries with socialized medicine where folks can afford cancer treatments have a much better rate of survival than the US does.

You've posted a couple of links where folks died from Laetrile in an attempt to cure their cancer. Yes, it happens - you CAN overdose from it. However, there are a LOT more people (who aren't selling anything) claiming that Laetrile cured them.

Okay, let me pose some honest questions: how do you know that the cases are real? And how do you know they had a cancer diagnosis that a doctor confirmed (some people believe they have cancer when they don't have it?) I could tell you that infusions of catnip cured my cataracts... and how would you know that this is true? (It didn't, and I don't have them.)

You've seen ads for bizops on tv and on Internet -- "I'm making 50,000/week at my part time business!"... with the teeny print "results not typical. This is an actor" at the bottom.

Cancers DO go into remission... but I wouldn't rely on that happening.

Laetrile is still a poison and people do die from it... far more often than they die from other treatments.

I do know the basics of science that you posted. I use most of them and more.

I am not going to go into defending myself, but will answer this

Okay, let me pose some honest questions: how do you know that the cases are real? And how do you know they had a cancer diagnosis that a doctor confirmed (some people believe they have cancer when they don't have it?) I could tell you that infusions of catnip cured my cataracts... and how would you know that this is true? (It didn't, and I don't have them.)

Yes, as a matter of fact, I did know one. Many of our old timers talk about an old man at my volunteer firehouse and said he cleared up his cancer, forget which type, by eating three apples and their seeds everyday. He later died of a heart attack in his 70's.

I don't understand why you wish to pick apart everything I am saying. I am sharing what I have learned with others at risk of getting cancer like myself. I wish to prevent it in myself. I am not some idiot who will fall for claims of a "Cure for ALL cancers" testimonial. I also fully expect anyone to be smart enough to do their own homework too.

I will say that folks shouldn't listen to you or me, but to think about it and research yourselves using Byrds recipe above.

I also don't remember reading many articles titled "Man dies from eating too many apples and their pits" any more often than "Man dies from eating too much cotton candy". Sure you can die from it, but what doesn't kill you in excess besides vacations?