To base the whole argument of whether Laetrile works or
not on laboratory experiments and their results is ludicrous.
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!
