Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
A Cancer Cure, B17, a Pasteurised Seed and a Banned Tree
Options
-
11-11-2011 1:40am#1From here.
Link that describes how the B17 (Amygdalin, Nitrilosides) works.Vitamin B17, Raw Bitter Almonds, and Apricot Seeds
In 2007, bitter almonds (not regular almonds) were becoming popular with alternative medicine due to their vitamin B17 content. Health food stores stopped selling B17 in the form of apricot seeds in 2002, due to armed raids. The F.D.A. openly banned apricot seeds, and the extract, because it was touted as a cure for cancer; and curing is not allowed in America. The British Government followed suit, and did the very same things during 2002. Innocent people in both countries were arrested and charged for merely selling apricot seeds, a carrier of B17 (laetrile).
Bitter almonds were later discovered as the highest source of this vitamin. Vitamin B17 was still a somewhat newly discovered vitamin, and it is rarely found in nature. In fact, there are organizations affiliated with orthodox medicine which still will not officially recognize vitamin B17 as a vitamin. The reason for the exploding popularity of vitamin B17, and thereby bitter almonds, was due to the fact that vitamin B17 has dramatic and miraculous cancer killing properties.
While alternative medicine has had effective and non-toxic cancer cures since the 1930's, the new vitamin really looked like a magic bullet. There were reports everywhere of cancers being killed merely from patients eating heaping servings of bitter almonds daily. Soon there would be almond extract capsules, so that these same patients would need only to take one cheap, non-toxic pill per day. It did not bode well for the pharmaceutical industry. Hundreds of billions of dollars were about to be lost.
In September of 2007, the F.D.A. claimed that raw almonds had been linked to two salmonella outbreaks in five years, and that all almonds needed to be pasteurized, because they were suddenly a danger to the nation's health. These salmonella outbreaks were not due to any organic almonds, which reminds us of the many meat recalls.
Salmonella and e-coli are present in our foods only because of grossly unhygienic factory conditions; not because any natural foods are inherently covered with bacteria. For the organic bitter almonds, the required pasteurization would bring only one significant change in them. It would neutralize the vitamin B17. Pristine almonds are the only easily accessible source of vitamin B17. They are illegal now by F.D.A. decree. The highest source of B17, the bitter almond tree, was banned from the U.S. in 1995.
Never before in history had any nation practiced the absurdity of pasteurizing dry (often salted) nuts.
It is difficult to write or speak about the topic with a straight face, but in reality, this is a very serious issue. Americans may not use raw almonds for food anymore, and much more importantly, Americans are outlawed from using bitter almonds (vitamin B17) to cure cancer. We believe that this was the agenda all along. Judging from the F.D.A.'s bizarre aggression towards almonds that contain intact vitamin B17, and apricot seeds, it is easy to conclude just how powerful and effective vitamin B17 is for curing cancer, at least for those of us who are knowledgeable about the F.D.A.'s history.
Despite floods of phone calls and letters of disapproval to the U.S.D.A. and the F.D.A., almonds sold in the U.S. must now be pasteurized. These same agencies have notified food producers that they may freely and dishonestly label their pasteurized almonds as 'raw'. Therefore, if you see almonds in the United States that are labeled as 'raw', then you can know with certainty that the company producing them is lying, and we would recommend boycotting them.
Most almonds are pasteurized with Propylene oxide. Propylene oxide is a known carcinogen, and it is on California's Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause both cancer and reproductive harm. This means that the majority of almonds sold in the U.S. are not only nutritionally neutralized, but contain dangerous chemical toxins as well. Remember that before the F.D.A. decided almonds must be tainted to make them healthy, almonds were so healthful that they could quickly cure cancer without side effects in most test subjects. Alternative medicine's magic bullet just had to go!
Whole Foods only sells almonds which have been pasteurized with steam, which is an improvement over poisonous pasteurization methods; but it still degrades the nutritional value of almonds, and of course, eliminates all of the anti-cancer vitamin B17. There is usually no way to know which method has been used for pasteurization, because labeling laws are made to benefit the manufacturers, and deceive the consumers.
Wait A Minute! Aren't Bitter Almonds Poisonous?
According to the modern F.D.A., bitter almonds are poisonous, but somehow bitter almonds became a serious health danger just after it was also discovered that they contain the cancer destroying vitamin B17. Funny how that works. Bitter almonds had been eaten by humanity unimpaired during the previous 9,000 years of history.
People who warn us about bitter almonds typically state that they contain prussic acid (a chemical precursor to cyanide compounds), and hydrocyanic acid (also in the cyanide family). Similar compounds exist in benign organic forms in most of our healthiest foods, so while it is true that bitter almonds contain these compounds (like other healthy foods), is it also equally true that our science does not understand how these organic forms operate inside the body. The danger of bitter almonds is generally assumed based on the discovery of these compounds, and not on empirical evidence of people actually dying. Real science does not present assumptions as facts.
We cannot find even a single verifiable and credible case of death by almonds. The idea sounds almost ridiculous, doesn't it? We can find stories of deaths from almond consumption in medical journals, blogs, and pro-pharma web sites, but just try to trace any of those reports to real deceased people. They usually do not exist, and this speaks volumes about the tactics of our adversaries. In the handful of cases in which bitter almonds or other sources for laetrile were cited as the cause of death, the victims did not show the classic symptoms of cyanide poisoning.
In most cases, the victims were taking chemotherapy too, and the symptoms more closely matched that of death by chemo. Talk about passing the buck! The most emphasized death was that of Chad Green, who supposedly died of his alternative treatments, but we cannot uncover any in-depth details of his death. We figure that's probably intentional.
Now Barely Legal ― Vitamin B-17
"While there are sources for laetrile pills, they are essentially illegal to sell across state lines. While the FDA would say that laetrile is legal to sell across state lines, the process they designed to allow its sale essentially makes it illegal. In order to buy laetrile legally, you must go to a medical doctor, the medical doctor must notify the FDA, the FDA must approve the purchase and then the doctor can purchase the laetrile. What is wrong with this picture?
"What is wrong is that no doctor in their right mind would let the FDA know they were using laetrile in their practice. The FDA would immediately notify the AMA, and the AMA would yank the person's license (unless they had a really good lawyer and a lot of money). Thus, it is effectively illegal to purchase laetrile pills."
Vitamin B17 has technically become legal in the United States again, but it is still banned as a medicine by the F.D.A. This means that Americans may legally own sources of B17, give them away, or sell them in their own state; but doctors are officially forbidden from using or even discussing B17 unless a patient mentions the subject first. The A.M.A. is fully backing the F.D.A. on this issue, and one has to ponder why they are acting so afraid of this vitamin.
A person still places himself in great legal jeopardy if he discloses what his B17 products are capable of medically, because this would be considered by the F.D.A. to be practicing medicine, making unapproved claims, and promoting a banned medicine to boot.
Be careful discussing such things with a regular doctor, because he may tell child protective services that you are "medically neglecting" your child, and if he doesn't do it, the A.M.A. certainly will whenever it is notified. They have no reservations whatsoever about destroying your family to protect their lucrative industry.
Vitamin B-17 Is Not A Supplement
Vitamin B17 is still used as an alternative cancer treatment today, but it is not an essential nutrient. It should not be used as a supplement because it is generally unnecessary for good health, and the effects of using it over an extended period are unknown. Misuse or improper use of concentrated B17/laetrile may be harmful in some situations. We do not have time or space to write about these special cases, so our official recommendation is to use B17/laetrile only under the close supervision of a naturopathic doctor, or someone else knowledgeable about it. Remember, regular doctors are forbidden from even discussing it with you.
More Info.
Surpressed Cure or.........?1
Comments
-
The FDA claim it was banned because of it's toxicity.
The fruit kernels which Laetrile is derived from have trace amounts of cyanide in them and excessive amounts ingested could cause poisoning.
Too much of anything is usually poisonous...
Tuna and other fish contain dangerous mercury and I'm sure if you eat enough, it will cause neurological damage.
I haven't researched this enough so I'm on the fence.
The FDA have in the past approved many drugs which are dangerous so I'm not sure what difference it would make approving Laetrile for cancer treatment.
Is there evidence to suggest it cured cancer?0 -
The FDA claim it was banned because of it's toxicity.
The fruit kernels which Laetrile is derived from have trace amounts of cyanide in them and excessive amounts ingested could cause poisoning.
Too much of anything is usually poisonous...
Tuna and other fish contain dangerous mercury and I'm sure if you eat enough, it will cause neurological damage.
I haven't researched this enough so I'm on the fence.
The FDA have in the past approved many drugs which are dangerous so I'm not sure what difference it would make approving Laetrile for cancer treatment.
Is there evidence to suggest it cured cancer?
Its not approved because clinical trials showed it had no clinical benefits, the "FDA cover up conspiracy" is just a way of making money from gullible people.0 -
Yes, but the FDA knowingly approved drugs in the past which were proven to be dangerous and of little benefit.
I'd rather not get into that because it goes off topic but let's just say it's a revolving door between government and pharma industry.
I'm not arguing Laetrile can cure or prevent cancer because I honestly don't know, I just know that the FDA are no guardian angels.
Also, having skimmed through the FDA report on reasons to ban it, they cited deaths caused by Amygdalin but this is a different chemical to Laetrile...so i'm not sure why it was even mentioned.
On p7 of decision to ban it
In one case, an 11 month old girl in Attica, New York, died after ingesting up to five of her father's 500 milligram Laetrile tablets.
Her death was listed by the medical examiner as "due to Amygdalin ingestion"
1) Amygdalin is not Laetrile, they're different.
2) Any kid of that age would die ingesting excessive amounts of pharmaceutical drugs.
The point is, the decision puts emphasis on toxicity here...that's the reasoning behind the ban, its toxicity.0 -
Yes, but the FDA knowingly approved drugs in the past which were proven to be dangerous and of little benefit.
I'd rather not get into that because it goes off topic but let's just say it's a revolving door between government and pharma industry.
I'm not arguing Laetrile can cure or prevent cancer because I honestly don't know, I just know that the FDA are no guardian angels.
Also, having skimmed through the FDA report on reasons to ban it, they cited deaths caused by Amygdalin but this is a different chemical to Laetrile...so i'm not sure why it was even mentioned.
This showed no benefit in three trials according to wiki, funny how in the op article they claim it cures cancer without proof, yet decry the FDA for assuming it was toxic.
Pretty poor propaganda piece only for the gullible. Why does alt medicine get such an easy ride in the CT forum?0 -
Yes, but the FDA knowingly approved drugs in the past which were proven to be dangerous and of little benefit.
I'd rather not get into that because it goes off topic but let's just say it's a revolving door between government and pharma industry.
I'm not arguing Laetrile can cure or prevent cancer because I honestly don't know, I just know that the FDA are no guardian angels.
Also, having skimmed through the FDA report on reasons to ban it, they cited deaths caused by Amygdalin but this is a different chemical to Laetrile...so i'm not sure why it was even mentioned.
On p7 of decision to ban it
In one case, an 11 month old girl in Attica, New York, died after ingesting up to five of her father's 500 milligram Laetrile tablets.
Her death was listed by the medical examiner as "due to Amygdalin ingestion"
1) Amygdalin is not Laetrile, they're different.
2) Any kid of that age would die ingesting excessive amounts of pharmaceutical drugs.
The point is, the decision puts emphasis on toxicity here...that's the reasoning behind the ban, its toxicity.
The reasoning behind the ban is not just toxicity, its beacuse it doesn't work. The fact its toxic means they have to protect gullible and desperate people0 -
Advertisement
-
I think we need to maintain a sense of perspective. Almonds (raw, crushed, toasted, chopped, bitter, sweet, etc.) have been consumed by humans for hundreds, perhaps thousands of years. People eat almonds in vast concentrated form in Christmas and wedding cakes as almond icing (the stuff under the white icing). Wedding cakes, Christmas cakes, almond slices and other confections use almonds as part of the ingredients as well as in the icing; almonds get sprinkled on ice-cream and so-called "almond-milk" derived from almonds is used as a food flavouring / flavour-enhancer. Personally I can't remember any cases of people being diagnosed with almond caused cancer after weddings, Christmas, afternoon tea or Hallow'een.The FDA claim it was banned because of it's toxicity.
The fruit kernels which Laetrile is derived from have trace amounts of cyanide in them and excessive amounts ingested could cause poisoning....
If almonds really are as toxic as the FDA claims (although reports seem unclear on the actual claims being made) maybe we should force-feed all FDA personnel on them.0 -
Alright folks, close down the forum...jh79 has expressed his opinion. :rolleyes:0
-
I believe Tim Mininchin said it best;
"Do you know what we call alternative medicine that works?"
"Medicine".0 -
There's no such thing as vitamin B17. It's a number arbitrarily assigned to this chemical by homeopaths/quacks to make it appear legit.
Vitamins are a group of life-essential chemicals which organisms need in varying quantities in order to survive. This chemical is not one of them.
Anyone who knows even the smallest thing about cancer would understand that a single chemical or oil or treatment could ever be considered a "cancer cure". Cancer is not a pathogen and is therefore not universally vulnerable to any single form of treatment.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Not sure if it gets an easy ride as you say, but it's funny you ask that. I was wondering about the exact same thing in regard to mainstream medicine.
The whole pharmaceutical industry is beyond the term Conspiracy theory ... they thrive on it ... Swine flu was so brilliantly plugged
0
Advertisement