The Cellar - View Single Post

rtexanssane · 04-05-2006, 09:40 PM

Marichiko. You have said some things that have forced me back into the thread because i am wandering about something now which is going to force me to do more research.
One of us has been misinformed. Essentially i am interested in the truth and not in being right so i have to consider the possibility that it is you that are right and me that is misinformed, but i am not set either way just now.
Here is the point of contention for me. You quoted from an article that said.

"Laetrile is the trademark of a compound of two parts glucose and one part cyanide. There is no vitamin B17, "B17" is a trade name created for laetrile by a laetrile proponent. It is naturally present in the kernels of apricot pits and a number of other stone fruits and nuts. There is no RDA but doses vary from 0.25 g to 1.0 g a day."

I have not come accross the statement even from the opponents of Laetrile that B17 does not exist. It was originally identified as part of the Nitriloside family and is a complete molecule locked inside a membrane.
The molecule itself consists of 2 units of Glucose, 1 unit of Hydrogen cyanide and 1 unit Benzaldehide.
So what concerns me is the part of the statement that says that Laetrile consists of 2 units and 1 part Cyanide.
G. Edward Griffin as a result of his research says in his book and documentary "World without Cancer" that Benzaldehide and cyanide acting together are 100 times more toxic than either acting alone and it is this which kills the cancer cell.
This makes sense to me because Vitamin B12 which also contains cyanide has as far as i know never been considered for treating cancer.
If this be the case then the concentrated form of B17 Laetrile is lacking a vital compound.
Also the article referred to by Kitsune said that there is more than one type of Laetrile. That Mexican Laetrile is not the same as the Laetrile originally developed by Krebs in the USA.
If these things are true then i am willing to concede that there could be a problem with Laetrile and that this concentrated form of B17 may be a misuse of a naturally occuring compound in many foods.
I am not a crank who just accepts any conspiracy theory. I was motivaed to do some research into B17 when i first heard about it for the simple reason that millions of people are still dying despite the efforts of conventional medicine. It makes sense to look at other possibilities under such circumstances.
I am not willing to dismiss the possibilty that B17 in its natural form in various foods can prevent cancer, but i am thankful to you all for forcing me to take a second look at the whole picture.
I need more research.

04-05-2006, 09:40 PM	#50
rtexanssane Wiseacre Emeritus Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 35	Marichiko. You have said some things that have forced me back into the thread because i am wandering about something now which is going to force me to do more research. One of us has been misinformed. Essentially i am interested in the truth and not in being right so i have to consider the possibility that it is you that are right and me that is misinformed, but i am not set either way just now. Here is the point of contention for me. You quoted from an article that said. "Laetrile is the trademark of a compound of two parts glucose and one part cyanide. There is no vitamin B17, "B17" is a trade name created for laetrile by a laetrile proponent. It is naturally present in the kernels of apricot pits and a number of other stone fruits and nuts. There is no RDA but doses vary from 0.25 g to 1.0 g a day." I have not come accross the statement even from the opponents of Laetrile that B17 does not exist. It was originally identified as part of the Nitriloside family and is a complete molecule locked inside a membrane. The molecule itself consists of 2 units of Glucose, 1 unit of Hydrogen cyanide and 1 unit Benzaldehide. So what concerns me is the part of the statement that says that Laetrile consists of 2 units and 1 part Cyanide. G. Edward Griffin as a result of his research says in his book and documentary "World without Cancer" that Benzaldehide and cyanide acting together are 100 times more toxic than either acting alone and it is this which kills the cancer cell. This makes sense to me because Vitamin B12 which also contains cyanide has as far as i know never been considered for treating cancer. If this be the case then the concentrated form of B17 Laetrile is lacking a vital compound. Also the article referred to by Kitsune said that there is more than one type of Laetrile. That Mexican Laetrile is not the same as the Laetrile originally developed by Krebs in the USA. If these things are true then i am willing to concede that there could be a problem with Laetrile and that this concentrated form of B17 may be a misuse of a naturally occuring compound in many foods. I am not a crank who just accepts any conspiracy theory. I was motivaed to do some research into B17 when i first heard about it for the simple reason that millions of people are still dying despite the efforts of conventional medicine. It makes sense to look at other possibilities under such circumstances. I am not willing to dismiss the possibilty that B17 in its natural form in various foods can prevent cancer, but i am thankful to you all for forcing me to take a second look at the whole picture. I need more research.