Cancer should not exist. Part 1

rtexanssane · 04-24-2006, 09:07 PM

I owe marichico an apology for pointing out the spelling errors. Now i look back they are pretty awful.
About the logic though. I would like some of you to tell me clearly what your arguments are against the vitamin and enzyme aproach to cancer therapy and why you think that there is no evidence that B17 prevents cancer to begin with.
The only testing done that yeilded negative results were those authorised by the FDA who have only ever allowed Laetrile to be tested by its opponents.
People who had no experience with nutritional therapy and who feel the same way about natural therapies as the FDA.
This is a double standard because the the drug companies are allowed to do all their own testing and so get those tests carried out the way they know they should be.
Furthermore those tests only included the use of Laetrile and metabolic therapy includes a comprehensive nutritional programme which is highly successful outside the US.
The FDA has spread paranoia reguarding Cyanide while failing to point out that ther is actually no free cyanide floating around in laetrile. It must be manufactured by the enzyme Beta-Glucosidase which is only found in large enough quantities to release the Cyanide and Benzaldehyde in cancer cells

For more on this and a nice little diagram that shows how B17 works read here:
http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk...ndcyanide.html

For some insight into why the Sloan Kettering tests failed so miserably read here:
http://www.whale.to/cancer/manner.html

I would also point out that there are some Prominent and reputable names from around the globe within accepted medicine that highly endorse the use of Laetrile in cancer therapy. Here are some of them.

Dr Hans Nieper, former Director of the Department of Medicine at Silbersee Hospital in Hanover, Germany: During a visit to the United States in 1972, Dr Nieper told reporters: "After more than twenty years of such specialised work, I have found non-toxic nitrilosides - that is, Laetrile - far superior to any other known cancer treatment or preventative. In my opinion, it is the only existing possibility for the ultimate control of cancer."

In Canada, Dr N R Bouziane, former Director of Research Laboratories at St Jeanne D'Arc Hospital in Montreal, published his repeated successes in treating cancers with nutrition, which were written up in the medical literature, including the Cancer News Journal, Jan/April 1971, p.20, under the article heading "The Laetrile Story".

In the Philippines, Dr Manuel Navarro, former Professor of Medicine and Surgery at the University of Santo Tomas, Manila, and an internationally recognised cancer researcher with over 100 major scientific papers to his credit, treated terminally ill cancer patients with Laetrile for over 25 years. He stated in the Cancer News Journal: "It is my carefully considered clinical judgement, as a practising oncologist and researcher in this field, that I have obtained most significant and encouraging results with the use of Laetrile-amygdalin in the treatment of terminal cancer patients..."

In Mexico, Dr Ernesto Contreras, one of the country's leading medical specialists in nutritional treatment for cancer for over 30 years, remarks of B17-Laetrile's action with extreme terminal cancer cases: "The palliative action [the ability of a substance to improve the comfort of a patient] is in about 60% of the cases. Frequently, enough to be significant, I see arrest of the disease or even regression in some 15% of the very advanced cases."

Ernesto's son Francisco Contreras continues the work today after his father's retirement. Francisco is author of The Hope of Living Cancer Free in which he lays out the protocols his clinic has used to marvellous success in treating thousands of patients since 1963.

In Italy, Professor Etore Guidetti, of the University of Turin Medical School, announced startling results with Laetrile in successfully combating many types of cancer, including cervix, breast, uterus and rectum. After a speech, an American doctor rose in the audience, challenging the Italian professor that Laetrile had been found to be worthless in the United States. Dr Guidetti was abrupt and dismissive: "I care not what was determined in the United States. I am merely reporting what I saw in my own clinic."
Extracted from B17 Metabolic Therapy by Phillip Day
© Copyright 2003

So i say to anyone challenging this to bring something to the table that is not part of the FDA smear campaign that has been going on for over 60 years and that the rest of the world does subscribe to.

04-24-2006, 09:38 PM

Where to start? I have both an undergraduate degree and a Master's degree in biological science (although I am NOT a real doctor). I worked as a medical librarian for a number of years. I am highly interested in the use of both herbal and nutitional medicine. I do NOT dismiss alternative medicine out of hand.

Not a single person you listed has published his findings in a scientific, peer reveiwed journal. Not a single one has published an experimental protocol which other researchers in the field can follow to attain the same results.

The FDA does not tell universities what they may and may not study. If you want to indulge in paranoid conspiracy theories, you need to go elsewhere. I spent the better part of 20 years either as a student of the life sciences or working with graduate students and professors in the fields of medicine, pharmacology, biology, chemistry, and the other sciences. Never ever , not once were the moods or possible prejudices of the FDA a matter of concern.

Scientists studying nutrition are NOT censored, nor are they denied funding for study and experimentation.

I've stated it before, and I'll state it for the final time. Your claims regarding laetril would be easy to prove if they were valid by simply using a few hundred lab rats in a double blind study. The scientist who proved the cancer treatment/preventative worth of laetril or any other substance would be on the front cover of the Journal of the American Medical Society, Nature, Science, and any other number of prestigous scientific journals. The FDA is NOT a part of the peer review process on any reputable scientific publication.

You so obviously have zero undedrstanding of scientific research, what drives it, and how results are published that its not even worth debating this topic with you further.

I doubt if you could even explain to me or anyone else what the scientific method is. Your head is filled with propaganda fed to you by the laetril hucksters and that's all you want to hear.

Go ahead and poison yourself with "natural" cyanide. Just please don't kill innocent people who are as ignorant of modern medicine as you are with your ill advised manifestos.

laebedahs · 04-24-2006, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rtexanssane

I would also point out that there are some Prominent and reputable names from around the globe within accepted medicine that highly endorse the use of Laetrile in cancer therapy. Here are some of them.

Dr Hans Nieper, former Director of the Department of Medicine at Silbersee Hospital in Hanover, Germany: During a visit to the United States in 1972, Dr Nieper told reporters: "After more than twenty years of such specialised work, I have found non-toxic nitrilosides - that is, Laetrile - far superior to any other known cancer treatment or preventative. In my opinion, it is the only existing possibility for the ultimate control of cancer."

In Canada, Dr N R Bouziane, former Director of Research Laboratories at St Jeanne D'Arc Hospital in Montreal, published his repeated successes in treating cancers with nutrition, which were written up in the medical literature, including the Cancer News Journal, Jan/April 1971, p.20, under the article heading "The Laetrile Story".

In the Philippines, Dr Manuel Navarro, former Professor of Medicine and Surgery at the University of Santo Tomas, Manila, and an internationally recognised cancer researcher with over 100 major scientific papers to his credit, treated terminally ill cancer patients with Laetrile for over 25 years. He stated in the Cancer News Journal: "It is my carefully considered clinical judgement, as a practising oncologist and researcher in this field, that I have obtained most significant and encouraging results with the use of Laetrile-amygdalin in the treatment of terminal cancer patients..."

In Mexico, Dr Ernesto Contreras, one of the country's leading medical specialists in nutritional treatment for cancer for over 30 years, remarks of B17-Laetrile's action with extreme terminal cancer cases: "The palliative action [the ability of a substance to improve the comfort of a patient] is in about 60% of the cases. Frequently, enough to be significant, I see arrest of the disease or even regression in some 15% of the very advanced cases."

Ernesto's son Francisco Contreras continues the work today after his father's retirement. Francisco is author of The Hope of Living Cancer Free in which he lays out the protocols his clinic has used to marvellous success in treating thousands of patients since 1963.

In Italy, Professor Etore Guidetti, of the University of Turin Medical School, announced startling results with Laetrile in successfully combating many types of cancer, including cervix, breast, uterus and rectum. After a speech, an American doctor rose in the audience, challenging the Italian professor that Laetrile had been found to be worthless in the United States. Dr Guidetti was abrupt and dismissive: "I care not what was determined in the United States. I am merely reporting what I saw in my own clinic."
Extracted from B17 Metabolic Therapy by Phillip Day
© Copyright 2003

So i say to anyone challenging this to bring something to the table that is not part of the FDA smear campaign that has been going on for over 60 years and that the rest of the world does subscribe to.

I'd like to point out that three of the six people you pointed out as proponents of Laetrile made those <strike>mistakes</strike> statements over 30 years ago, one of them even 40 years ago. Can you quote more recent backings? I think we both know you can't.

What disturbs me more is one of the people you quote, the Italian professor, did exactly what you're claiming us to do: dismissing it without consideration or even a whim thought. Also, the Canadian doctor you quote in the second paragraph doesn't even mention Laetrile/B17/amygdalin at all! He simply says "treating cancer with nutrition". That's it.

Can you explain the above away like you've been trying with all other posts?

rtexanssane · 04-25-2006, 02:52 AM

Marichiko. Its interesting that you should mention experiments with rats because the Sloan Kettering institute used mice and it as not until a certain Dr Manner stopped using the same mice that Sloan kettering used that he got amazing results.

Read here. http://www.whale.to/cancer/manner.html

Now you read that interview and tell me whose approach followed the scientific method as you understand it.

Respect to you though Marichiko those are impressive qualifications and i did not realise from your posts here that you also have interest in alternative medicine both herbal and nutritional.
I myself have no qualifications whatsoever, i have just done a ton of research on this specific issue looking at both the findings of the opponents and the supporters of Laetrile.
You are right, i could not give you an exact definition of the scientific method i would have to look it up. i know that basically a scientist has no buisness starting out as being for or against something. He/shemust be neutral which i imagine is damned hard to do in the first place.

I really wanted to stay away from the Laetrile side of the vitamin B17 issue.
The problem i see here is that the opposition that it stirred back in 1952 has created a climate in which the testing of which you speak cannot be conducted in an unbiased setting.
Instead what we have is a situation where anyone who wants to propose Laetrile risks their career and outright ridicule from their peers.
The FDA has gone on record as labelling Laetrile as outright fraud. I read so on their official webste.

http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_exp.html

This has not been demonstrated to be the case. When a genuine scientific fraud is uncovered you dont get raging debates about it for the next 50 years.
Take the case of Piltdown Man.
There are metabolic therapy clinics the world over. Are there also science classes in schools where Piltdown Man is cited as the missing link in the evolutionary chain ? I think not

The FDA has no right to make such a statement and they carry huge weight as an organisation even though they can only enforce a ban in the US.
Here in Britain the NHS will not use anything that has been found to be of no value by the FDA.
Only 2 weeks ago one of our chainstores (Julian Graves) had to pull all of its Apricot Kernals from its shelves due to a cyanide scare from "Oversees"

http://www.dailyindia.com/show/16956...ealth_problems

This article is nothing less than a bare faced lie saying that it is only safe to eat 2 kernals per day when i myself have been eating 10 per day along with tens of thousands of others around the globe who have been doing so for years and cancer patients can safely take up to between 4-6 500mg Laetrile tablets per day.
The article that i just linked even has ads right next to it of where to get them. The whole thing is a joke.

You said "The FDA does not tell universities what they may and may not study"
I am sorry to say that you are wrong in this Marichiko. Here is a clipping from the FDA website

"FDA does not manufacture drugs or directly research whether a drug is safe and effective. The FDA's role in this process is to oversee the pharmaceutical research conducted by drug companies, university research centers and physicians to make certain the federal regulation governing this research are being followed."

http://www.fda.gov/oashi/cancer/pdpat.html

Just try working on something in a university that they have unfairly labelled as outright fraud and guarenteed that they will then conduct their own investigation to prove to you and everyone else that your findings are false.
That is exactly what happened with Laetrile.
The FDA are leaned on by the Drug companies who have nothing to gain from research that cannot be patented, so its really those companies that you are up against.
I am not saying its a deliberate conspiracy. I am saying that it is blindness due to greed and arrogance.
"How can a simple vitamin solve a problem that respected medical scientists have been baffling over for all these years" has always been the current mentality in any period in history and this generation is no exception.

The evidence that Vitamin B17 selectively destroys cancer cells while not harming the body is overwhelming and i dont need a peer reviewed paper to prove it to me.

laebedahs. Those experts may have made those statement 30 years ago, but if they have not retracted those statements sinse and are still standing by Laetrile, then that counts as current does it not.
You are completely ignoring the fact that these clinics exist all around the globe.
The Itallian you mentioned dismissed what was found in the US which he is entitled to do. America does not own the planet and the peer review is not the bible.

Happy Monkey · 04-25-2006, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rtexanssane

peer review is not the bible.

Exactly. The Bible has to be accepted on faith. Peer review requires evidence. No number of testimonials has the credibility of one double-blind study, and multiple double-blind studes are best.

OnyxCougar · 04-25-2006, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Exactly. The Bible has to be accepted on faith. Peer review requires evidence. No number of testimonials has the credibility of one double-blind study, and multiple double-blind studes are best.

Small but very crucial difference:

The bible itself is fact. It's the content of the writing within that (arguably) has to be accepted on faith.

laebedahs · 04-25-2006, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rtexanssane

laebedahs. Those experts may have made those statement 30 years ago, but if they have not retracted those statements sinse and are still standing by Laetrile, then that counts as current does it not.
You are completely ignoring the fact that these clinics exist all around the globe.
The Itallian you mentioned dismissed what was found in the US which he is entitled to do. America does not own the planet and the peer review is not the bible.

No, no it doesn't count as current. Do you even know what that word means? "occurring in or belonging to the present time". "Current" and "recent" are subjective words, this is true; however I'm sure everyone here can agree that 30 years is not anywhere near current or recent.

I don't think you fully absorbed what I said, so I'll point it out again, just in case you missed it: 'the Canadian doctor you quote in the second paragraph doesn't even mention Laetrile/B17/amygdalin at all! He simply says "treating cancer with nutrition". That's it.'

What about this doctor?

04-24-2006, 09:07 PM	#1
rtexanssane Wiseacre Emeritus Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 35	I owe marichico an apology for pointing out the spelling errors. Now i look back they are pretty awful. About the logic though. I would like some of you to tell me clearly what your arguments are against the vitamin and enzyme aproach to cancer therapy and why you think that there is no evidence that B17 prevents cancer to begin with. The only testing done that yeilded negative results were those authorised by the FDA who have only ever allowed Laetrile to be tested by its opponents. People who had no experience with nutritional therapy and who feel the same way about natural therapies as the FDA. This is a double standard because the the drug companies are allowed to do all their own testing and so get those tests carried out the way they know they should be. Furthermore those tests only included the use of Laetrile and metabolic therapy includes a comprehensive nutritional programme which is highly successful outside the US. The FDA has spread paranoia reguarding Cyanide while failing to point out that ther is actually no free cyanide floating around in laetrile. It must be manufactured by the enzyme Beta-Glucosidase which is only found in large enough quantities to release the Cyanide and Benzaldehyde in cancer cells For more on this and a nice little diagram that shows how B17 works read here: http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk...ndcyanide.html For some insight into why the Sloan Kettering tests failed so miserably read here: http://www.whale.to/cancer/manner.html I would also point out that there are some Prominent and reputable names from around the globe within accepted medicine that highly endorse the use of Laetrile in cancer therapy. Here are some of them. Dr Hans Nieper, former Director of the Department of Medicine at Silbersee Hospital in Hanover, Germany: During a visit to the United States in 1972, Dr Nieper told reporters: "After more than twenty years of such specialised work, I have found non-toxic nitrilosides - that is, Laetrile - far superior to any other known cancer treatment or preventative. In my opinion, it is the only existing possibility for the ultimate control of cancer." In Canada, Dr N R Bouziane, former Director of Research Laboratories at St Jeanne D'Arc Hospital in Montreal, published his repeated successes in treating cancers with nutrition, which were written up in the medical literature, including the Cancer News Journal, Jan/April 1971, p.20, under the article heading "The Laetrile Story". In the Philippines, Dr Manuel Navarro, former Professor of Medicine and Surgery at the University of Santo Tomas, Manila, and an internationally recognised cancer researcher with over 100 major scientific papers to his credit, treated terminally ill cancer patients with Laetrile for over 25 years. He stated in the Cancer News Journal: "It is my carefully considered clinical judgement, as a practising oncologist and researcher in this field, that I have obtained most significant and encouraging results with the use of Laetrile-amygdalin in the treatment of terminal cancer patients..." In Mexico, Dr Ernesto Contreras, one of the country's leading medical specialists in nutritional treatment for cancer for over 30 years, remarks of B17-Laetrile's action with extreme terminal cancer cases: "The palliative action [the ability of a substance to improve the comfort of a patient] is in about 60% of the cases. Frequently, enough to be significant, I see arrest of the disease or even regression in some 15% of the very advanced cases." Ernesto's son Francisco Contreras continues the work today after his father's retirement. Francisco is author of The Hope of Living Cancer Free in which he lays out the protocols his clinic has used to marvellous success in treating thousands of patients since 1963. In Italy, Professor Etore Guidetti, of the University of Turin Medical School, announced startling results with Laetrile in successfully combating many types of cancer, including cervix, breast, uterus and rectum. After a speech, an American doctor rose in the audience, challenging the Italian professor that Laetrile had been found to be worthless in the United States. Dr Guidetti was abrupt and dismissive: "I care not what was determined in the United States. I am merely reporting what I saw in my own clinic." Extracted from B17 Metabolic Therapy by Phillip Day © Copyright 2003 So i say to anyone challenging this to bring something to the table that is not part of the FDA smear campaign that has been going on for over 60 years and that the rest of the world does subscribe to.

04-24-2006, 09:38 PM	#2
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	Where to start? I have both an undergraduate degree and a Master's degree in biological science (although I am NOT a real doctor). I worked as a medical librarian for a number of years. I am highly interested in the use of both herbal and nutitional medicine. I do NOT dismiss alternative medicine out of hand. Not a single person you listed has published his findings in a scientific, peer reveiwed journal. Not a single one has published an experimental protocol which other researchers in the field can follow to attain the same results. The FDA does not tell universities what they may and may not study. If you want to indulge in paranoid conspiracy theories, you need to go elsewhere. I spent the better part of 20 years either as a student of the life sciences or working with graduate students and professors in the fields of medicine, pharmacology, biology, chemistry, and the other sciences. Never ever , not once were the moods or possible prejudices of the FDA a matter of concern. Scientists studying nutrition are NOT censored, nor are they denied funding for study and experimentation. I've stated it before, and I'll state it for the final time. Your claims regarding laetril would be easy to prove if they were valid by simply using a few hundred lab rats in a double blind study. The scientist who proved the cancer treatment/preventative worth of laetril or any other substance would be on the front cover of the Journal of the American Medical Society, Nature, Science, and any other number of prestigous scientific journals. The FDA is NOT a part of the peer review process on any reputable scientific publication. You so obviously have zero undedrstanding of scientific research, what drives it, and how results are published that its not even worth debating this topic with you further. I doubt if you could even explain to me or anyone else what the scientific method is. Your head is filled with propaganda fed to you by the laetril hucksters and that's all you want to hear. Go ahead and poison yourself with "natural" cyanide. Just please don't kill innocent people who are as ignorant of modern medicine as you are with your ill advised manifestos.

04-25-2006, 02:52 AM	#4
rtexanssane Wiseacre Emeritus Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 35	Marichiko. Its interesting that you should mention experiments with rats because the Sloan Kettering institute used mice and it as not until a certain Dr Manner stopped using the same mice that Sloan kettering used that he got amazing results. Read here. http://www.whale.to/cancer/manner.html Now you read that interview and tell me whose approach followed the scientific method as you understand it. Respect to you though Marichiko those are impressive qualifications and i did not realise from your posts here that you also have interest in alternative medicine both herbal and nutritional. I myself have no qualifications whatsoever, i have just done a ton of research on this specific issue looking at both the findings of the opponents and the supporters of Laetrile. You are right, i could not give you an exact definition of the scientific method i would have to look it up. i know that basically a scientist has no buisness starting out as being for or against something. He/shemust be neutral which i imagine is damned hard to do in the first place. I really wanted to stay away from the Laetrile side of the vitamin B17 issue. The problem i see here is that the opposition that it stirred back in 1952 has created a climate in which the testing of which you speak cannot be conducted in an unbiased setting. Instead what we have is a situation where anyone who wants to propose Laetrile risks their career and outright ridicule from their peers. The FDA has gone on record as labelling Laetrile as outright fraud. I read so on their official webste. http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_exp.html This has not been demonstrated to be the case. When a genuine scientific fraud is uncovered you dont get raging debates about it for the next 50 years. Take the case of Piltdown Man. There are metabolic therapy clinics the world over. Are there also science classes in schools where Piltdown Man is cited as the missing link in the evolutionary chain ? I think not The FDA has no right to make such a statement and they carry huge weight as an organisation even though they can only enforce a ban in the US. Here in Britain the NHS will not use anything that has been found to be of no value by the FDA. Only 2 weeks ago one of our chainstores (Julian Graves) had to pull all of its Apricot Kernals from its shelves due to a cyanide scare from "Oversees" http://www.dailyindia.com/show/16956...ealth_problems This article is nothing less than a bare faced lie saying that it is only safe to eat 2 kernals per day when i myself have been eating 10 per day along with tens of thousands of others around the globe who have been doing so for years and cancer patients can safely take up to between 4-6 500mg Laetrile tablets per day. The article that i just linked even has ads right next to it of where to get them. The whole thing is a joke. You said "The FDA does not tell universities what they may and may not study" I am sorry to say that you are wrong in this Marichiko. Here is a clipping from the FDA website "FDA does not manufacture drugs or directly research whether a drug is safe and effective. The FDA's role in this process is to oversee the pharmaceutical research conducted by drug companies, university research centers and physicians to make certain the federal regulation governing this research are being followed." http://www.fda.gov/oashi/cancer/pdpat.html Just try working on something in a university that they have unfairly labelled as outright fraud and guarenteed that they will then conduct their own investigation to prove to you and everyone else that your findings are false. That is exactly what happened with Laetrile. The FDA are leaned on by the Drug companies who have nothing to gain from research that cannot be patented, so its really those companies that you are up against. I am not saying its a deliberate conspiracy. I am saying that it is blindness due to greed and arrogance. "How can a simple vitamin solve a problem that respected medical scientists have been baffling over for all these years" has always been the current mentality in any period in history and this generation is no exception. The evidence that Vitamin B17 selectively destroys cancer cells while not harming the body is overwhelming and i dont need a peer reviewed paper to prove it to me. laebedahs. Those experts may have made those statement 30 years ago, but if they have not retracted those statements sinse and are still standing by Laetrile, then that counts as current does it not. You are completely ignoring the fact that these clinics exist all around the globe. The Itallian you mentioned dismissed what was found in the US which he is entitled to do. America does not own the planet and the peer review is not the bible.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)