Scientific Facts Behind Laetrile

[Guest guest]

Scientific Facts Behind Laetrile

 

---

 

To base the whole argument of whether Laetrile works or not on

laboratory experiments and their results is ludicrous.

 

http://www.1cure4cancer.com/scientificfacts.html

 

Humans conduct these experiments and humans lie. Since cancer research

and treatments run into the billions of dollars, the government agencies

along with the major cancer research centers will always hide the truth.

 

 

To be able to cure cancer with something so " trivial and inexpensive " a

treatment is tantamount to all Laetrile research by cancer research

centers being sabotaged.

 

" For the love of money is the root of all evil… " 1 Tim 6:10 KJV

 

" The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who

can know it? "

Jer 17:9 KJV

 

However, there are a few honest researchers with integrity who have not

played the political cancer game. Money is not what motivates these

people but the search for truth does. Here are their names with a brief

synopsis of their experiments with Laetrile:

 

Dr. Ernest T. Krebs, Jr. a biochemist and the researcher who first

isolated Laetrile in apricot seeds and also discovered B-15 (pangamic

acid, a vitamin which has been proven to be an important adjunctive

therapy in the treatment of illnesses related to circulation).

 

He spent three years of anatomy and medicine at Hahnemann Medical

College and then changed his direction and became a doctor of

biochemistry. He did undergraduate work at the University of Illinois

between 1938-41. He did graduate work at the University of Mississippi

and also at the University of California.

 

By 1950, he had isolated the nutritional factor in crystalline form and

named it Laetrile. He tested it on animals to make sure that it was not

toxic. He then had to prove that it was not toxic to humans. There was

only one thing to do.

 

He rolled up his sleeve and injected Laetrile into his own arm. As he

predicted, there were no harmful or distressing side effects.

 

(I find it interesting to note that Dr. Krebs was more than willing to

test his theory about Laetrile on himself while cancer doctors and their

personnel take great precautions to be sure they themselves are not

exposed to the drugs they administer to their cancer victims, I mean

patients.)

 

Dr. Krebs authored many scientific papers in his lifetime. He was the

recipient of numerous honors and doctorates both at home and abroad. He

was the science director of the John Beard Memorial Foundation before

his death in 1996.

 

Dr. Dean Burk, Director of the Cytochemistry Section of the federal

government's National Cancer Institute reported that, in a series of

tests on animal tissue, the (Laetrile) vitamin B-17 had no harmful

effect on normal cells but was deadly to a cancer cell.

 

In another series of tests, Dr. Burk reported that Laetrile was

responsible for prolonging the life of cancerous rats eighty percent

longer than those in the control group that were not inoculated.

 

Dr. Burk was one of the foremost cancer specialists in the world. He was

the recipient of the Gerhard Domagk Award for Cancer Research, the

Hillebrand Award of the American Chemical Society, and the Commander

Knighthood Of the Medical Order of Bethlehem (Rome) founded in 1459 by

Pope Pius the Eleventh. He held a Ph.D. in biochemistry earned at the

University of California.

 

He was a Fellow of the National Research Council at the University of

London, of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Biology, and also Harvard.

He was senior chemist at the National Cancer Institute, which he helped

establish, and in 1946 became Director of the Cytochemistry Section.

 

He belonged to eleven scientific organizations, wrote three books

relating to chemotherapy research in cancer, and was author or co-author

of more than two-hundred scientific papers in the field of cell

chemistry. He is a biochemist. If Dr. Burk says that Laetrile works, I

believe him!

 

Let us look at one more study. For five years, between 1972 and 1977,

Laetrile was meticulously tested at Sloan-Kettering under the direction

of Dr. Kanematsu Sugiura.

 

Dr. Sugiura was the senior laboratory researcher at Sloan-Kettering with

over 60 years experience. He had earned the highest respect for his

knowledge and integrity. He was the perfect person to conduct

experiments since his quest for truth blocked out anything else. Dr. C.

Chester Stock, the man in charge of Sloan-Kettering's laboratory-testing

division wrote this about Dr. Sigiura, " Few, if any, names in cancer

research are as widely known as Kanematsu Sugiura's…

 

Possibly the high regard in which his work is held is best characterized

by a comment made to me by a visiting investigator in cancer research

from Russia. He said, " When Dr. Sugiura publishes, we know we don't have

to repeat the study, for we would obtain the same results he has

reported. " " (Ralph Moss, The Cancer Syndrome, New York: Grove Press,

1980 pg. 258)

 

The official report about Laetrile from Dr. Sigiura read: " The results

clearly show that Amygdalin significantly inhibits the appearance of

lung metastasis in mice bearing spontaneous mammary tumors and increases

significantly the inhibition of the growth of the primary tumors…

Laetrile also seemed to prevent slightly the appearance of new tumors…

 

The improvement of health and appearance of the treated animals in

comparison to controls is always a common observation… Dr. Sugiura has

never observed complete regression of these tumors in all his cosmic

experience with other chemotherapeautic agents. " ( " A Summary of the

Effect of Amygdalin Upon Spontaneous Mammary Tumors in Mice, "

Sloan-Kettering report, June 13, 1973.)

 

Dr. Sugiura's report was cause for great alarm at Sloan-Kettering.

Remember, cancer is over a billion dollars a year industry. This report

would cause the house of cards to collapse. As would be expected then,

many more experiments were conducted by others who were not as honest as

Dr. Sugiura.

 

At a press conference, Dr. Sugiura was asked suddenly by a reporter if

he stuck to his report. Dr. Sugiura clearly and boldly stated, " I

stick, " even though Sloan-Kettering was trying to discredit everything

that he did. To read about the many times that Sloan-Kettering tried to

discredit their finest researcher, get the book, " World Without Cancer, "

by G. Edward Griffin.

 

Now, even though we have proof from the laboratories, let us look at

what is being discovered in prominent physicians' studies:

 

(The following is taken from the book, " World Without Cancer " , by G.

Edward Griffin, published by American Media, Westlake Village, CA)

 

" As early as 1974, there was at least twenty-six published papers

written by well-known physicians who had used Laetrile in the treatment

of their own patients and who have concluded that Laetrile is both safe

and effective in the treatment of cancer.

 

Dr. Hans Nieper, of West Germany, former Director of the Department of

Medicine at the Silbersee Hospital in Hanover. He is a pioneer in the

medical use of cobalt and is credited with developing the anti-cancer

drug, cyclophosphamide.

 

He is the originator of the concept of " electrolyte carriers " in the

prevention of cardiac necrosis. He was formerly the head of the

Aschaffenburg Hospital Laboratory for chemical circulatory research. He

is listed in Who's Who in World Science and has been the Director of the

German Society for Medical Tumor Treatment.

 

He is one of the world's most famous and respected cancer specialists.

During a visit to the U.S. in 1972, Dr. Nieper told news reporters,

" After more than twenty years of such specialized work, I have found the

nontoxic 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 there is N.R. Bouziane, M.D., former Director of Research

Laboratories at St. Jeanne d'Arc Hospital in Montreal and a member of

the hospital's tumor board in charge of chemotherapy. He graduated magna

cum laude in medicine from the University of Montreal.

 

He also received a doctorate in science from the University of Montreal

and St. Joseph's University, an affiliate of Oxford University in New

Brunswick. He was a Fellow in chemistry and a Fellow in hematology, and

certified in clinical bacteriology, hematology and biochemistry from the

college. He also was Dean of the American Association of Bio?Analysts.

After the first series of tests with Laetrile shortly after it was

introduced, Dr. Bouziane reported:

 

We always have a diagnosis based on histology [microscopic analysis of

the tissue]. We have never undertaken a case without histological proof

of cancer...

 

In our investigation, some terminal cases were so hopeless that they did

not even receive what we consider the basic dose of thirty grams. Most

cases, however, became ambulatory and some have in this short time

resumed their normal activities on a maintenance dose. (Cancer News

Journal, Jan./Apr. 1971, pg. 20)

 

In the Philippines there is Manuel Navarro, M.D., former Professor of

Medicine and Surgery at the University of Santo Tomas in Manila; an

Associate Member of the National Research Council of the Philippines; a

Fellow of the Philippine College of Physicians, the Philippine Society

of Endocrinology and Metabolism; and a member of the Philippine Medical

Association, the Philippine Cancer Society, and many other medical

groups.

 

He has been recognized internationally as a cancer researcher and has

over one?hundred major scientific papers to his credit, some of which

have been read before the International Cancer Congress. In 1971 Dr.

Navarro wrote:

 

I ... have specialized in oncology [the study of tumors] for the past

eighteen years. For the same number of years I have been using

Laetrile?amygdalin in the treatment of my cancer patients.

 

During this eighteen year period I have treated a total of over five

hundred patients with Laetrile?amygdalin by various routes of

administration, including the oral and the I.V. The majority of my

patients receiving Laetrile?amygdalin have been in a terminal state when

treatment with this material commenced.

 

 

It is my carefully considered clinical judgment, as a practicing

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, and that these results are

comparable or superior to the results I have obtained with the use of

the more toxic standard cytotoxic agents.

(Letter from Dr. Navarro to Mr. Andrew McNaughton, The McNaughton

Foundation, dated January 8, 1971, published in the Cancer News Journal,

Jan./April, 1971, pp. 19,20.)

 

In Mexico there is Ernesto Contreras, M.D., who, for over three decades,

has operated the Good Samaritan Cancer Clinic (now called the Oasis

Hospital) in Tijuana. He is one of Mexico's most distinguished medical

figures. He received postgraduate training at Harvard's Children's

Hospital in Boston. He has served as Professor of Histology and

Pathology at the Mexican Army Medical School and as the chief

pathologist at the Army Hospital in Mexico City

 

Dr. Contreras was introduced to Laetrile in 1963 by a terminal cancer

patient from the United States who brought it to his attention and urged

him to treat her with it. The woman recovered, and Dr. Contreras began

extensive investigation of its properties and use. Since that time he

has treated many thousands of cancer patients, most of whom are American

citizens who have been denied the freedom to use Laetrile in their own

country.

 

Dr. Contreras has summarized his experiences with vitamin therapy as

follows:

 

The palliative action [improving the comfort and well?being of the

patient] is in about 60% of the cases. Frequently, enough to be

significant, I see arrest of the disease or even regression in some of

the very advanced cases. (Cancer News Journal, Jan./April, 1971, pp. 20.

We must bear in mind that these are terminal patients-people who have

been given up as hopeless by orthodox medicine. Fifteen percent recovery

in that group is a most impressive accomplishment.)

 

In Japan there is Shigeaki Sakai, a prominent physician in Tokyo. In a

paper published in the October 1963 Asian Medical journal, Dr. Sakai

reported:

 

Administered to cancer patients, Laetrile has proven to be quite free

from any harmful side?effects, and I would say that no anticancer drug

could make a cancerous patient improve faster than Laetrile. It goes

without saying that Laetrile controls cancer and is quite effective

wherever it is located.

 

In Italy there is Professor Etore Guidetti, M.D., of the University of

Turin Medical School. Dr. Guidetti spoke before the Conference of the

International Union Against Cancer held in Brazil in 1954 and revealed

how his use of Laetrile in terminal cancer patients had caused the

destruction of a wide variety of tumors including those of the uterus,

cervix, rectum, and breast. " In some cases, " he said, " one has been able

to observe a group of fulminating and cauliflower?like neoplastic masses

resolved very rapidly. "

 

He reported that, after giving Laetrile to patients with lung cancer, he

had been " able to observe, with the aid of radiography, a regression of

the neoplasm or the metastases. "

 

After Guidetti's presentation, an American doctor rose in the audience

and announced that Laetrile had been investigated in the United States

and found to be worthless.

 

Dr. Guidetti replied, " I do not care what was determined in the United

States. I am merely reporting what I saw in my own clinic. " (Cancer News

Journal, Jan./April, 1971, p. 19)

 

In Belgium there is Professor Joseph H. Maisin, Sr., M.D., of the

University of Louvain where he was Director of the Institute of Cancer.

He also was President Emeritus of the International League Against

Cancer which conducts the International Cancer Congress every four

years.

 

And in the United States there are such respected names as Dr. Dean Burk

of the National Cancer Institute; Dr. John A. Morrone of the Jersey City

Medical Center; Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., who developed Laetrile; Dr.

John A. Richardson, the courageous San Francisco physician who

challenged the government's right to prevent Laetrile from being used in

the United States (See John A. Richardson, M.D., and Patricia Griffin,

R.N., Laetrile Case Histories; The Richardson Cancer Clinic Experience

published by Westlake Village, CA: American Media, 1977); Dr. Philip E.

Binzel, Jr., a physician in Washington Court House, Ohio, who has used

Laetrile for over twenty years with outstanding success (Philip E.

Binzel, M.D., Alive and Well: One Doctor's Experience with Nutrition in

the Treatment of Cancer Patients, published by American Media, Westlake

Village, CA, 1994); and many others from over twenty countries with

equally impeccable credentials. " (End of quote from World Without

Cancer, by G. Edward Griffin).

 

In my opinion, these results are more credible than something that can

be worked up in a laboratory. The proof of whether Laetrile works or not

is undisputed by eyewitness accounts from these highly respected

physicians who have had many years of seeing people recover from their

cancer by using Laetrile therapy. Remember, laboratory experiments can

be manipulated to produce any result that the researcher is looking for.

Unscrupulous men have used these reports for their own gain and benefit,

not for the cancer patients. Laetrile is a vitamin that cannot be

patented. It is not worthy to used in cancer treatment since it is not

making the conglomorate pharmaceutical companies, research centers, etc.

any money. To them, the only solution is drugs, even though they know

without any doubt that these drugs do not work. To prove it, let's take

a look at what surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy really do to the

cancer patient.

 

Surgery is the least harmful of the three. Surgery can be life-saving if

there are intestinal blockages that must be relieved to prevent death of

secondary complications. There is also the psychological advantage of

visually removing the tumor and offering the temporary comfort of hope.

However, the degree to which surgery is useful is the same degree to

which the tumor is not malignant. The greater the proportion of cancer

cells in the tumor, the less likely that surgery will help. The most

malignant tumors are generally considered inoperable. There are also two

to consider that cutting into the tumor, even for a biopsy, does. First,

there is trauma to the area. This triggers the healing process, which in

turn, brings more trophoblast cells (the start of cancer) into being as

a by-product of that process. (See chapter IV of the book, " World

Without Cancer " , by G. Edward Griffin, for more information on the

trophoblast thesis of cancer.) The second thing is that if not all the

malignant tissue is removed, what remains may become encased in scar

tissue from the surgery. Consequently, the cancer tends to become

insulated from the action of the pancreatic enzymes which are essential

for exposing trophoblast cells to the surveillant action of the white

blood cells. There is also no solid evidence that surgery that patients

who submit to surgery have any greater life expectancy, on the average,

that those who do not. For more information regarding the many studies

that have been done regarding surgery, see the book, " World Without

Cancer " , by G. Edward Griffin.

The rationale behind X-ray therapy is the same as with surgery. The

objective is to remove the tumor, but to do so by burning it away rather

than cutting it out. Here, also, it is primarily the non-cancer cell

that is destroyed. The more malignant the tumor, the more resistant it

is to radio therapy. If this were not so, then X-ray therapy would have

a high degree of success-which, of course, it does not. It also

increases the likelihood of cancer developing in other parts of the

body. X-rays induce cancer because of at least two factors. First, they

do physical damage to the body whichs triggers the production of

trophoblast cells as part of the healing process. Second, they weaken or

destroy the production of white blood cells which constitutes the

immunological defense mechanism, the body's front-line defense against

cancer. As with surgery, there is little or no solid evidence that

radiation actually improves the patient's chances for survival. For more

information regarding the many studies that have been done regarding

radiation therapy, see the book, " World Without Cancer " , by G. Edward

Griffin.

We have now briefly viewed the miserable results obtained by orthodox

surgery and radiation. However, the record of so-called anti-cancer

drugs is even worse. The primary reason for this is that most of them

currently in use are highly poisonous, not just to cancer but to the

rest of the body as well. Generally, they are more deadly to healthy

tissue than they are to the malignant cell. All substances can be toxic

if taken in sufficient amounts. This is true of aspirin, sugar, Laetrile

or even water. But, unlike those, the anti-cancer drugs are poisonous,

not as a result of an overdose or as a side-effect, but as a primary

effect. In other words, anti-cancerous drugs are deliberately poisonous.

It is the desired effect. Now, these chemicals are selected because they

are capable of differentiating between types of cells and, consequently,

of poisoning some types more than others. But don't jump to the

conclusion that they differentiate between cancer and non-cancer cells,

killing only the cancer cells, because they do not.

The cellular poisons used in orthodox cancer therapy today cannot

distinguish between cancer and non-cancer cells. They act instead to

differentiate between cells that are fast-growing and those that are

slow-growing or not growing at all. Cells that are actively dividing are

the targets. Consequently, they kill, not only the cancer cells that are

dividing, but also a multitude of normal cells all over the body that

also are caught in the act of dividing. In the case of a cancer that is

dividing at the same rate or even slower than normal cells, there isn't

even a theoretical chance of success in killing the cancer cells before

the poison kills the patient. Poisoning the system is the objective of

these drugs. The toxins catch the blood cells in the act of dividing and

cause blood poisoning. The gastrointestinal systsem is thrown into

convulsion causing nausea, diarrhea, loss of appetite, cramps, and

progressive weakness. Hair cells are fast growing, so the hair falls our

during treatment. Reproductive organs are affected causing sterility.

The brain becomes fatigued. Eyesight and hearing are impaired. Every

conceivable function is disrupted with such agony for the patient that

many of them elect to die of the cancer rather than to continue

treatment. I have already said elsewhere on this page that the personnel

who administer these drugs to cancer patients take great precautions to

be sure they themselves are not exposed to them. Because these drugs are

so dangerous, the Chemotherapy Handbook lists sixteen OSHA safety

procedures for medical personnel who work around these drugs. The

procedure for disposing needles and other equipment used with these

drugs is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency under the

category of " hazardous waste " . Yet, these same substances are injected

directly into the bloodstream of hapless cancer patients supposedly to

cure their cancer! A report from the Southern Research Institute, dated

April 13, 1972, based upon research conducted for the National Cancer

Institute, indicated that most of the accepted drugs in the American

Cancer Society's " proven cures " category produced cancer in laboratory

animals that previously had been healthy! Can you believe it? These

drugs are carcinogenic! How can poison and hazardous waste products cure

anyone of anything?!!!! So why do doctors use chemotherapy if it is

toxic, an immunosuppressant, carcinogenic, and futile? The answer is

that they don't know what else to do. Doctors do not like to tell any

patient that there is no hope. In his own mind he knows there is none,

but he also knows that the patient does not want to hear that and will

seek another physician who will continue some kind of treatment, no

matter how useless or fatal it may be, so the doctor will continue to

treat the patient himself. In his book The Wayward Cell, Cancer, Dr.

Victor Richards made it clear that chemotherapy is used primarily just

to keep the patient returning for treatment and to build his morale

while he dies. But there is more! He said, " Nevertheless, chemotherapy

serves an extremely valuable role in keeping patients oriented toward

proper medical therapy, and prevents the feeling of being abandoned by

the physician in patients with late and hopeless cancer. Judicious

employment and screening of potentially useful drugs may also prevent

the spread of cancer quackery. " (Victor Richards, The Wayward Cell,

Cancer; Its Origins, Nature, and Treatment; Berkeley: The University of

California Press, 1972, pp. 215-16)

Heaven forbid that anyone should forsake the nauseating, pain-racking,

cancer-spreading, admittedly ineffective " proven cures " for such

" quackery " as Laetrile! Here we have revealed, the true goal of much of

the so-called " educational " programs of orthodox

medicine-psychologically to condition people to not try any other forms

of therapy.

So let's sum up the four different options of dealing with cancer:

 

SURGERY: Least harmful. Sometimes a life-saving, stop-gap measure. No

evidence that patients who receive radical or extensive surgical options

live any longer than those who receive the most conservative options,

or, for that matter, those who receive none at all. Believed to increase

the likelihood of disseminating cancer to other locations. When dealing

with internal tumors affecting reproductive or vital organs, the

statistical rate of long-term survival is, on the average, 10-15%. After

metastasis, the statistical chances for long-term survival are close to

zero.

 

RADIOLOGY: Very harmful in many ways. Spreads the cancer and weakens the

patient's resistance to other diseases. Serious and painful

side-effects, including heart failure. No evidence that treated patients

live any longer, on the average, than those not treated. Statistical

rate of long-term survival after metastasis is close to zero.

 

CHEMOTHERAPY: Also spreads the cancer through weakening of immunological

defense mechanism plus general toxicity. Leaves patient susceptible to

other diseases and infections, often leading to death from these causes.

Extremely serious side-effects. No evidence that treated patients live

any longer, on the average, than untreated patients. Statistical rate of

long-term survival after metastasis is close to zero.

 

VITAMIN THERAPY: Non-toxic. Side effects include increased appetite,

weight gain, lowered blood pressure, increased hemoglobin and red-blood

cell count. Eliminates or sharply reduces pain without narcotics. Builds

up body's resistance to other diseases. Is a natural substance found in

foods and is compatible with human biological experience. Destroys

cancer cells while nourishing non-cancer cells. Considering that most

patients begin vitamin therapy only after they have been cut, burned, or

poisoned by orthodox treatments and have been told that there no longer

is any hope, the numbe rof patients who have been brought back to normal

health on a long-term survival basis (15%) is most encouraging. For

those who turn to vitamin therapy first, the long-term survival rate is

greater than 80%!

 

Wow, what a difference Laetrile does to a person. It is my opinion that

everyone should read the book " World Without Cancer " , by G. Edward

Griffin for a clearer understanding of cancer, the way the human body

gets it, and the politics that keep vitamin therapy outside the masses

grasp. Even if you do not have cancer, you will benefit from this book.

 

Cancer does not have to be feared anymore, just like we do not fear

scurvy, rickets, beri-beri, etc. We have not been left defenseless on

this earth but we need to have ears to hear the truth and to apply the

truth to our lives for life.

 

No human being loves you better than you do. No doctor, researcher,

politician, etc. Only Yahweh loves you more. He has provided this

information so we will be able to live whole and fruitful lives, not

enslaved to the political sources behind the scenes. Study for yourself

what is truth and the truth will set you free!

_