Just a few things on laetrile and it's efficacy.
I strongly urge people purchase a book called "cancer why we're still dying to know the truth" by Phillip Day.(no I'm neither the author or a sales agent for the book)
Within the pages of this book, all your questions on cancer and the natural alternatives to fighting and preventing it will be answered.
If you are a doctor practicing conventional medicine or just a straight out sceptic, you'll at least be impressed by this book.
This book is a compilation of doctors reports on their experiences with using laetrile and other alternative methods on their own patients, and even explains why we get cancer at all.
I have pretty much copied and pasted this message from another area where i attempted to answer a forum members questions on laetrile, but feel it important enough for people to know the truth behind the MSKCC trials, and so I've started a fresh topic on it.
The four doctors who were actually involved in the laetrile trials at Memorial Sloan Kettering were dr. Kanematsu Sugiura, dr.Elizabeth Stockert, dr. Lloyd Schloan & dr. Fran Schmidt.
These doctors were hand picked as the best of the best.
Each were eventually dismissed from the trial and forced to make way for the next doctor after one by one they all reported laetrile as being far superior to chemo toxins in every way, when combined with enzyme and vitamin therapy.
Each had their reports suppressed by the board of directors at MSKCC, we know this for a fact because Ralph Moss (assistant director of the department of public affairs for MSKCC) told the world through a media press conference of the laetrile trial cover ups.
He was fired the very next day.http://www.ralphmoss.com/mskccletter1.html
Eventually the tests were tried outside MSKCC and handed over to a known anti laetrile cancer specialist, dr.Daniel Martin at the Catholic medical centre, where he carried out a double blind test on mice of which half were injected with salt water solution and the other half injected with laetrile.
Dr. Martin eventually reported that the mice using the salt water solution were showing tumour regression 40% of the time, and that there was no difference in the tumour regression in the mice using laetrile.
Can you believe that?
In other words dr. Martin was saying that salt water was either an effective cancer control, or these tumours just shrank regardless of what his mice were receiving.
Obviously it was the mice using laetrile that were showing tumour regression 40% of the time, and dr.Martin was trying to make the trial look as though laetrile had no superior advantage over salt water, and therefore was useless.
It was this report that the board members of MSKCC were looking for, and finally released to the public.
Laetrile has never caused the death of anyone in recorded history, if there were any such cases proven, the F.D.A would have plastered this unfortunate persons name and details on front page news around the world.
Laetrile/ amygdalin is not a cure, but a very effective cancer control.
You cannot cure cancer, but you can totally reverse it, or at least control it.
By the way, laetrile is not the be all and end all of natural treaments for cancer, but is a user friendly chemotherapy.
Cancer starts off as a healing process which has not stopped on completion of its task.
The nutritional state of the body and its immune system are key to wether or not this healing process terminates, and unless you address the bodys' nutritional state, cancer will inevitably almost always return.
I wonder how many people on this website were constantly exposing their mouths or throat to carcinogens ( e.g cigarettes ) and now have mouth cancer.
Cancer begins at the site of an onging injury either from external or internal factors.
Please, please do yourself a favour and read the alternative views to what cancer actually is and avoid becoming another cancer statistic.
Quackery in medicine is filling a patients veins with poisonous toxins (chemo)and expecting the patient to be cured, its barbaric.
Fighting fire with fire creates more fire.
Please remember this, in the early 1900s cancer statistics in the western world were 1/500, by the 1950s it was 1/30 and today its 1/3.
Are we winning the war on cancer with modern medicine?
And yet the procedures for fighting cancer are unchanged even though researchers have spent billions of dollars on research.
What has all this spending got us?
A cancer crisis.
Pharmaceutical companies are not deliberately trying to kill people by holding back on a control for cancer, they are simply not interested in spending millions of dollars trialing a product which cannot be patented.
If there is no trial, then the F.D.A will not approve it, and so laetrile/ amygdalin will never be approved and therefore remains "unproven" by the F.D.A.
It's simply business, infact the cancer business is estimated to be a 200 billiion dollar per year industry world wide.
Interestingly, you may have a chuckle to yourself while reading this BBC report on the following link http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/festi...f_science/913463.stm the Imperial college of London, in 2000 were working on cyanide releasing drugs for cancer.
I will finish by telling you that my family and I must be freaks of nature since we regularly eat up to 15 apricot kernels per day and have been doing so for years, without dying.
Amygdalin is also a vital food component for most animals, are the F.D.A checking these animals?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: aconre8,

Hi aconre8
I read your post on the other thread, was it yesterday? It all sounds very interesting but I must say that my husband had neck cancer and has NEVER been a smoker so not everyone who gets this disease gets it from constantly exposing their mouths or throats to carcinogens.
We have a friend who also extols the virtues of apricot kernels and eats heaps of them. He hasn't died and neither have I (and I don't eat them!)
Trevor and I were just saying today that there are so many different theories for what is the best and most effective method of treatment for cancer and everyone has to find their own 'right' way. We both agreed that there must be heaps of successes and failures for each and every one. I even heard today that Patrick Swayze now has spots in his liver inspite of the wondrous Cyberknife treatment.
I don't mean to discount your ideas, nor the merit of the Cyberknife, but the truth is that sometimes EVERYTHING works for someone.
Thanks for putting this information forward.
What part of Australia are you from?
Cheers
Deborah

Hi Deborah 51.

I completely understand there are no hard and fast rules to cancer, my comments are based on the most common cancer triggers in most common cancers.(the cause of injury)
It is a truly multi-factoral disease.
I know some people will die from their cancer, no matter what they do, but sometimes it's about the quality of the remainder of life.
I've watched relatives, including the recent death of my own father, have their suffering increased ten fold by side effects from chemo and radiation therapy.
Spending the last two months of your life hooked up to a chemo drip is no life.

If one was to study the majority of cancer cases, one soon realises there are common factors about it.
We westerners suffer from these debilitating diseases more than any other culture on earth.
Bowel cancer is the most common factor for both
western men and women.
The typical western diet and general exposure to toxins in our environment is key to what does us in.
There are 18 known cultures on earth that either have never experienced cancer, or it is extremely rare ( Labridor Eskimo, Karakorum and Hunzas of eastern Pakistan, authentic bush living Australian Aboriginals & the Hopi Indians of Arizona are among them)
These people can live to an average age of 100 years and beyond, without 1st class doctors, hospitals or private health care.
We obviously haven't learned anything from these so called "backward tribes".
If you were to do some research on professor John Beard and his "Unitarian trophoblastic theory", you would be completely amazed at what this guy discovered at the turn of the last century in regards to cancer and pregnancy.

I sincerely wish your husband a full recovery, I hope he's at least attempting natural healing along with his conventional treatment.
Or is he now in complete remission?

By the way, I too am from S.A (the driest state in the world)
I have no greenery left in my yard.

Keep healthy Deborah51

This message has been edited. Last edited by: aconre8,

Hi there
I agree that our typical diets have a lot to answer for ~ we have diseases today that are so widespread in comparison to 50 or 60 years agoand basically our diet has probably undergone the biggest change over that time.
What I have never heard though is that any aborigine ever lived to, let alone beyond 100 years of age! One of the biggest concerns in regard to aboriginal health is that their life expectancy is roughly 20 years less than white Australians.
I don't know where you live, however I am in Sth Aust and it was distressing to learn last year when Trevor was having his first round of treatment, that cancer patients from the Northern Territory have to come to Adelaide for treatment. I was also surprised at the number of full blood aborigines among them. These poor people are so out of place in the hospital environment, it was/is awful.
I appreciate that even though these people may be full bloods, doesn't mean they are true bush dwellers, however I know through my niece who lives in a community west of Alice Springs that bush tucker is still a big part of their diet. That being the case, it seems to me that some people are more susceptible to cancer than others regardless of diet and lifestyle.
We had a friend visiting on the weekend who has always been a fitness freak and this year (aged 59) he has had two strokes and also had half of his prostate removed because of a tumour.
It seems to me that all any of us can do is the best we can and hope for the best!
Cheers
Deborah