Cancer, sugar and vitamin B17

[Mahes Ananda]

That sugar is extracted from sugar cane, not a candy sugar.

I dont know what you mean to say, but when you start experimenting, please use white refined sugar. (as cane sugar contains protein residues)

My fist posting here, just because i feel it is very impotant. Is it so that refined sugar is a very cancerpromoting product? I have heard that in the refiningproces many chemicals are jused, even as animalbones. I do not know how it works, but for what I have heard refined sugar is one of the mean couses of the rise of all kinds of cancer all over the world.

So please fill me in here.

Sorry for faults in my use of the language. If some people would be so kind to mail me in Dutch, ecspecialy about where to buy proper nuts I would very much appreciate that.

Thank you all for being here.

[Nawado]

Hi Mahes,

Welkom

I don't see the point of eating refined sugar so I don't do it. (I only eat whole fruits, nuts, egg yolks, salmon and water.)

There are multiple purifying and filtering processes to create white sugar which use chemicals and sometimes bone char.
It is I think also a big discussion in the vegan world.

Jan from Belgium

[RRM]

How exactly does sugar cause cancer, in your view?
(keep in mind that its highly purified)

[johndela1]

I have heard refined sugar is one of the mean couses of the rise of all kinds of cancer all over the world.

Where did you hear this? There are many people who believe sugar is bad. They believe it so much that they don't really see all the research and read what they need to enforce their belief.

I'm not saying sugar is bad or good, just that you really need to check sources and have as many sources as possible before concluding anything.

[halfgaar]

If I may jump in. I've heard that sugar causes cancer too. Not only that, but that cancer is a natural defense response to high consumption of suger, seeing as how tumors consume a lot of glucose. I don't remember where I read about it, but I don't put much stock into this theory.

When it comes to cancer, I'm pretty convinced of the vitamin B17 hypotheses, which states that cancer can be very easily cured and prevented.

[johndela1]

When it comes to cancer, I'm pretty convinced of the vitamin B17 hypotheses, which states that cancer can be very easily cured and prevented.

Do you believe that anyone with any type of cancer can be cured %100 of the time? If not, how often does this work?

Are there controlled studies that show the effectiveness of this?

[halfgaar]

Griffin states that laetrile (medicinal concentrated B17) treatment is effective for 80% of the patients when diagnosed early, whereas orthodox treatment cures 15%. In a metastasized cancer, the cure rate is 15% for leatrile and 0.1% for orthodox treatment.

And you have to remember that even if chemo cures you, you will have undergone a very damaging therapie, which doesn't contribute to your health, whereas laetrile doesn't have any side effects.

The world without cancer website is filled with references and studies about B17/laetrile.

[RRM]

If you believe that B17 can cure cancer; how does that work, in simple terms?
(what is cancer, and how does B17 fight that)

[halfgaar]

The thread I linked to explains it quite simply, in my opinion, but even more simply:

Vitamin B17 contains molecularly bonded cyanide and benzeldahyde (the cyanide is not hydrogen cyanide, which is the toxic variety). Because it's bonded, it's harmless. Cancer cells, and only cancer cells, produce an enzyme which unlocks the cyanide and forms hydrogen cyanide. Together with the benzaldahyde, which it also unlocks, it forms a very toxic combination which kills the cancer cell.

In contrast, there is another enzyme which bonds free floating cyanide into a harmless substance, and this enzyme is found everywhere, except in cancer cells. Fruits containing seeds which contains B17, like apples, contain this enzyme as well. So, you may die from eating a cup full of apple seeds (because some cyanide is always released from the B17 molecule), but had you had eaten the apples, you would not have died (provided you can eat a couple of crates of apples to begin with...)

[halfgaar]

BTW, the reason that the video I linked to in the other thread has disappeared from google video, also strengthens me in my convictions Lukcily, there is another one.

[RRM]

Cancer cells, and only cancer cells, produce an enzyme which unlocks the cyanide and forms hydrogen cyanide.

I guess you mean to say: specific cancer cells do so, because there is a great variety of cancer cells, creating a great variety of toxins, hormones and growth enhancers and inhibitors.

Together with the benzaldahyde, which it also unlocks, it forms a very toxic combination which kills the cancer cell.

Can you please refer me to the study that shows this specifically?

some cyanide is always released from the B17 molecule

So, basically, this is just another type of chemotherapy; fighting cancer with toxins.

[halfgaar]

I guess you mean to say: specific cancer cells do so, because there is a great variety of cancer cells, creating a great variety of toxins, hormones and growth enhancers and inhibitors.

World Without Cancer states that it's true for all cancer cells.

Can you please refer me to the study that shows this specifically?

I'd start with:

• Laetrile and the Life Saving Substance Called Cyanide
• AMYGDALIN MONOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
• The Nitrilosides ( Vitamin B-17 ) - Their Nature, Occurence and Metabolic Significance (Antineoplastic Vitamin B-17)

References can be found, so you should have ample material for the time being. If not, see more references and studies.

So, basically, this is just another type of chemotherapy; fighting cancer with toxins.

Chemotherapy is non-discriminant; radio-mimetic. Vitamin B17 is specific; harmless to normal cells. To get rid of something, you may have to poison it. Is that a bad thing? Your body needs to kill invading organisms all the time. To those organisms, leukocytes, lymphocytes, etc, are all toxic. But you nobody would consider that chemotherapy-like.

Should any hydrogen cyanide be released from the reaction in the cancer cell, the enzyme rhodanese will render it harmless. It can't handle you swallowing hydrogen cyanide of course, but it wasn't meant to that in the first place.

[RRM]

I guess you mean to say: specific cancer cells do so, because there is a great variety of cancer cells, creating a great variety of toxins, hormones and growth enhancers and inhibitors.

World Without Cancer states that it's true for all cancer cells.

On that website "Dr Krebs" also states that "Cancer cells all have the exact same characteristics", but there are various types of cancer cells, each producing specific growth factors / hormones. As thus, those specific types of carcinomas (malign tumors) have been named prolactinomas (producing prolactine), bombesinoma (producing bombesine) and so on.

Together with the benzaldahyde, which it also unlocks, it forms a very toxic combination which kills the cancer cell.

Can you please refer me to the study that shows this specifically?

I'd start with:
url, url, url

I got too little time now, but i will look into this.

[halfgaar]

On that website "Dr Krebs" also states that "Cancer cells all have the exact same characteristics", but there are various types of cancer cells, each producing specific growth factors / hormones. As thus, those specific types of carcinomas (malign tumors) have been named prolactinomas (producing prolactine), bombesinoma (producing bombesine) and so on.

But all produce beta-glucosidase, and therefore are susceptible to amygdaline (vitamin B17).

[RRM]

But all produce beta-glucosidase, and therefore are susceptible to amygdaline (vitamin B17).

If that was the case, studies should show that.
From the most recent review of studies regarding the effectiveness of amygdaline:

Laetrile is also sometimes referred to as amygdalin, although the two are not the same. ... The aim of this review is to summarize all types of clinical data related to the effectiveness or safety of laetrile interventions as a treatment of any type of cancer. ... CONCLUSION: Therefore, the claim that laetrile has beneficial effects for cancer patients is not supported by sound clinical data.

The discrepancy between theory and practise may be the complexity of the human body. Treating isolated cancer cells with amygdalyn is obviously not the same as administrating amygdalyn to the human body (afflicted by cancer).
Maybe that can be explained by the possibility that B17 is not that selective after all. Check out O'Brien B et al and Bromley J et al