Laetrile, FDA and Cancer

[dimi]

What do you guys think the reason behind the FDA ban is. Numerous reliable sources over the years have claimed and tested that it can help, if not treat cancer. The posted studies done by the FDA and the claimed toxicity have been criticized by well known scientists to be biased and untrue. Maybe I haven't done my research and am tapping into biased sources, but it seems like the FDA is extremely aggressive in trying to block this vitamin (b-17) from public consumption. It's also hard to find conclusive evidence as it is illegal.

http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/

For some background info you can google Laetrile too.

Discuss :dunno:

[jdmXSI]

the only viable explonation IMO is that normally a drug company has exclusivity for the first couple years, then it can be marketed to genericcompanies afterwards. It's kind of hard to get exclusivity on appricot seeds:dunno: it would just be too hard for the companies to control the market like they do with drugs already. I guess at the end of the day, it's all about profability of the product.

[dimi]

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=eO0I2jWthko

Maybe it's "bullshit", but the facts and success rates speak for themselves.

[em2ab]

Need to read this later.

[Pacman]

If this "snake oil" even had a remote chance of working, the big pharma companies would do the following:

1) isolate the molecule and identify the mechanism of action
2) modify the molecule
3) patent the molecule
4) release the news to the public so they can drive up their stock price
5) test the molecule
6) repeat steps 1 though 5 until they can replicate the resluts lab rats, beagle dogs and perhaps humans
4) market it and then make BILLIONS

Right now, many of the big pharma companies have BILLIONS invested in developing small molecules and protein chains with the hopes of finding the "silver bullet".

This will end up being as worthwhile as watching the Geraldo special on "Opening Capones Hidden Vault"

[dimi]

There is no need to find a "silver bullet" or "snake oil". As long as the general public is ignorant enough to keep taking the poisons they prescribe, why find a cure? I can't find a political/economical agenda behind that youtube clip, so why try promote something that is ineffective.

[dimi]

As for me, I come from an eastern European background. My grandfather owned a large farm where we had mainly apricot and peach trees (My age range at that time was 6-11). Now you have to understand that waste from where I come from is not encouraged (much lower standard of living). So as a kid I would save the apricot kernels and crack them open later. It was also a fun activity smashing them with stones, as you can probably understand. At times I can recall ingesting 30+ of these seeds when I would go on a smashing rampage. This had gone on for years and years and years. The whole harvest of apricot kernels from our farm would be mainly ingested by me.

The mere fact that some of these so called scientists have said that 7-10 of these kernels can be fatal to a child amazes me. Its true bullshit. There is no science behind that. I don't think I'm dead yet, and I have had a relatively healthy past, knock on wood. Maybe I am just superhuman and have special enzymes to digest the seed, but that is not the case. A lot of my friends would do the exact same thing.

To suggest that an apricot seed is poisonous, when there has only been one, I repeat ONE, NOT WELL documented case, is pure scientific sacrilege. The case also states that the user ingested a large cup of seeds 100+ at a single time. Aspirin has been shown to be poisonous in heavy doses, why the fuck is it not off my grocery shelves.

Maybe this isn't the cure and I'm not suggesting it is, but I would be asking myself some serious questions. Like why in the fuck has there been such an aggressive push by almost all medical institutions to inform consumers about the so called dangers of these seeds. Why has the FDA been so aggressive in its attempts to stop the mass spread of Laetrile/Amygdalin, the extract from these seeds. Why have people gone to jail (JAIL GUYS) over meetings to discuss the extracts. I have meetings with my buddies to discuss my quality of dope all the time.

I don't know about you guys but I'm eating my kernel seeds and my apples whole.

[TKRIS]

Cyanide isn't good for you.

Here you go:
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/laetrile.html

For any further medical questions of this nature, I'd strongly suggest a simple search on QuackWatch.
Barrett does a fantastic job of compiling and researching these types of claims, and while the site tends to be linguistically heavy, the quantity and quality of information found there is usually unrivaled.

From the article:

Victims In The News
As Laetrile became newsworthy, several cancer victims treated with it drew widespread media scrutiny. One was Chad Green, who developed acute lymphocytic leukemia at age 21. Although he was rapidly brought into remission with chemotherapy, his parents started him on "metabolic therapy" administered by a Manner Metabolic Physician. When Chad developed signs of cyanide toxicity, Massachusetts authorities had him declared a ward of the court for treatment purposes only. His parents then brought suit to reinstitute "metabolic therapy." When the court ruled against them, they fled with Chad to Mexico, where he was treated by Dr. Contreras. Several months later Chad died in a manner suggestive of cyanide poisoning. Dr. Contreras stated that the boy had died of leukemia, but was a good example of the effectiveness of Laetrile because he had died a pleasant death! Chad's parents stated that he had become very depressed because he missed his grandparents, his friends and his dog.

[dimi]

Originally posted by TKRIS
Cyanide isn't good for you.

Here you go:
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/laetrile.html

For any further medical questions of this nature, I'd strongly suggest a simple search on QuackWatch.
Barrett does a fantastic job of compiling and researching these types of claims, and while the site tends to be linguistically heavy, the quantity and quality of information found there is usually unrivaled.

From the article:

I want to respond in full but I have a midterm tomorrow so I don't have time to dig into my sources.

I read the Victims section, and it is only deceiving at best. Steve McQueen's death had nothing to do with Laetrile. In fact he personally stated the improvements that he felt during his medication on the drug. He died due to complications during his surgery. That shows enough about the validity of the source. The other two cases I am not familiar with.

I wouldn't read a source called Quackwatch. "Quackery" is used in the same connotation as "conspiracy theorist" these days. It is applied to anyone who questions the status quo, rather than accepting it, and by doing so is denied any legitimacy and usually labeled unpatriotic. Hell man, even the author tells you there will not be a cure.

"# A "simple and inexpensive" replacement for today's treatments is very unlikely. Cancer is not a single disease, but group of more than 100 different types. No single treatment has proven effective for every cancer, and no such "magic bullet" is likely to be discovered in the near future.
# Even if a magic bullet could be found, it would not be available soon and extensive testing would be required before standard treatments could be ethically abandoned in its favor. The necessary research would take many years, giving hospitals and medical schools time to adapt. Physicians and researchers would not be put out of work by any such innovation. If the new treatment results in an oversupply of cancer specialists, fewer physicians-in-training would choose this specialty, and some oncologists would retrain for another type of practice. Some researchers might need to change the focus of their research, but their basic skills should make that simple. " Ethics in the pharmaceutical sector? He does sum it up quite nicely though.

"# Widespread adoption of a quack cancer treatment would actually be the biggest threat its promoters could face, because competition would cause the price to drop."

What is he selling you? The billion dollar industry he endorses. What do the source I have posted above sell you? Fuck all...well I guess apricot seeds, but you buy those at community health foods.

"The purpose of this recital on the subject of cyanide is to clarify the continual misconception that laetrile contains chemical cyanide. It does not contain chemical cyanide, but it does contain cyanide ion (-CN). When laetrile is metabolized in the body it is converted to thiocyanate, a relatively non-toxic product that has inhibitory effect against cancer." (Contreras, 1982).

Maybe I'm just crazy. Fuck it, I'm done.

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by dimi
Steve McQueen's death had nothing to do with Laetrile. In fact he personally stated the improvements that he felt during his medication on the drug.


Bwahahahahahahaha.

I really hope, for your sake, that your midterm isn't science related...


Also funny:

he [McQueen] was treated with Laetrile at another Mexican clinic under the supervision of William D. Kelley, a dentist who had been delicensed by the State of Texas after several brushes with state and federal law enforcement authorities.

Yeah, that sounds legit. I know if I get cancer I'll be lined up to be looked after by a delicenced dentist who fled to Mexico in order to pretend to be a real doctor, practicing treatments (which are well documented as being dangerous) with no valid scientific benefits.
Fucking great plan. Plus, who doesn't like coffee enemas?!?
Also on my "To Do" list: Get serious surgery to remove a tumor, that top MEDICAL doctors say is inoperable, done by some guy in Mexico. Awesome job Steve and Dr.Dentist.

It's also worth noting that McQueen developped the massive tumor (who's removal resulted in his death, as predicted) after Dr. Dentist declared that he was doing GREEEEEEAAAAT and was gonna be back to normal in no time.
So much for shoving coffee up your ass and gorging on apricotes...

FWIW: The vast majority of advocates for counterproductive shit like this are true believers. The scumbag pieces of shit that fucking well know it doesn't work, but just don't give a shit, and use the fact that you're going to die anyway to justify milking you, are, fortunatly, few and far between IMHO.
These aren't all bad people, just desperate, delusional, and/or ignorant.

I've had more than my share of run-ins with those who believe Leatrile cures cancer, that flouride causes cancer and osteoporosis, that homeopathy works, that microwaves make food radioactive, that eating only raw food will keep your healthy, that vitamin C will prevent a cold, and all other flavors of pseudoscientific, new age bullshit. You're not stupid for believing any of these things, you're only stupid if you keep believing them after looking at the evidence.

Barrett is retired. He has nothing to gain by pandering to "Big Pharma" (as the crazies like to call it).
He made a career out of busting medical fraudsters and promoting science.

In any event, the only information you need to cast doubt on the validity of Laetrile as a cancer treatment can be found on the page you cited. Take a look at the "Success Stories" again, but take off the rosey color glasses and keep Occam's razor in mind this time. It reads like a "who's who" of logical falacies and baseless assumptions.

EDIT: If your google is broken, and you'd like me to explain cyanide, and chemistry in general, to you, I'm willing to do so.

[jdmXSI]

Im goin with Dimi on this, i have personally consumed Appricot seeds as well. odd enough, im still kickin' around... Maybe Leatrille isnt a cure, maybe it should be takin as a preventative measure to help protect against cancer. There are definate things that we as a society are lacking in our diet which our body needs to defend off disease and other ailments. There are also other theories that keeping a certin alkaline level in your blood stream does not allow cancer to survive. I for one would rather eat heathy and if that means consuming B-17 as preventative measure to lower my chances of getting cancer. That seems like a great route to take, rather then going through chemo/radiation treatment which kills not only the cancer cell but the good living ones as well. Anyways here is a diagram of the molecule itself, in theory the glucosidase breaks off the CN molecule only, which destroys the cancer cell, heres a diagram for ya.

It never hurts to keep an open mind.


http://www.apricotshop.co.uk/~apricots/images/uploads/ActionofB17.gif

[TKRIS]

Originally posted by jdmXSI
Im goin with Dimi on this, i have personally consumed Appricot seeds as well. odd enough, im still kickin' around...

Tik-Tok has a rock that might interest you.


Originally posted by jdmXSI
Maybe Leatrille isnt a cure, maybe it should be takin as a preventative measure to help protect against cancer. There are definate things that we as a society are lacking in our diet which our body needs to defend off disease and other ailments.

Jibber Jabber.


Originally posted by jdmXSI
There are also other theories that keeping a certin alkaline level in your blood stream does not allow cancer to survive.

Yes, as I pointed out in my last post, lot's of people believe lot's of very, very stupid things that are either completely unsubstantiated, or contrary to actual known information.
A buddy of mine is convinced the government is using chemtrails to control the weather... :rolleyes:
Just because some loon believes it doesn't make it so. You need actual solid evidence in order to be credible, and there isn't any here.


Originally posted by jdmXSI
I for one would rather eat heathy

Great idea.


Originally posted by jdmXSI
and if that means consuming B-17 as preventative measure to lower my chances of getting cancer.

Horrible, stupid idea.
1.) It's not a vitamin. Legendary crackpot Ernst Krebs tried to pass it off as a vitamin so he didn't have to pass any of the tests required for real medicine.
2.) It's not preventative, it's not a treatment, and despite it's periodic resurgence, it's been repeatedly rejected as being ineffective and overly dangerous in every credible study for over a hundred years.


Originally posted by jdmXSI
That seems like a great route to take, rather then going through chemo/radiation treatment which kills not only the cancer cell but the good living ones as well.

As oppose to this treatment, who's only real, proven, effect is to give the patient cyanide poisoning...


Originally posted by jdmXSI
Anyways here is a diagram of the molecule itself, in theory the glucosidase breaks off the CN molecule only, which destroys the cancer cell, heres a diagram for ya.

So I assume your google is broken as well, and the only sites you're privy to sell apricot seeds. lol
Cancer cells aren't the only things that contain beta-glucosidases. Your little tummy is chock full of em, which is why the incidents of cyanide poisoning is much higher when Laetrile is administered orally (which is common practice in most shithouse crazy places that'll actually do this shit).


Originally posted by jdmXSI
It never hurts to keep an open mind.


1.) Actually, in this instance, it does hurt, usually fatally so, to have a mind "open" (and I use that word euphamistically) enough to resort to metabolic "treatment" for cancer.
2.) "Sir, there is a distinct difference between having an open mind and having a hole in your head from which your brain leaks out." - James Randi