Woodpecker wrote:
Oh goodness, not again ! Your mention of amygdalin, laetrile or B17 suggests that you are becoming an encyclopedia of quack / alternative cures for cancer / autism.
vitamin B17 is not a vitamin, it is a nasty toxin which can cause cyanide poisoning.
Vitamine B12 comes in several different forms, one of which is the cyanide complex, be careful not to mix up B12 with B17.
Dr. Ernst Krebs was a
Quack !
Oh goodness, not again ! Your wholesale dismissal of what I said, while showing no comprehension of the majority of it, suggests you are becoming a parrot with no ability to think for himself.
B17 has been determined due to the research of many to be a vitamin in the B- class due to its wide occurrence in nature (including human foods), its water solubility, the fact that its breakdown products are used in a variety of metabolic reactions, and its essential NON-TOXICITY.
As you acknowledge, cyanocobalamin is a form of B12, and although it contains cyanide, it is non-toxic. Other forms of B12 without the cyanide radical can be used in cyanide poisoning, due to their affinity for the CN molecule. It is only excessive exposure to CN that is harmful, which is unlikely to happen with B17 unless you eat a very large quantity of seeds without eating the fruit (contains rhodanese, which detoxifies CN) and simultaneously eat a lot of foods with an excess of beta-glucosidase (enzyme that unlocks CN from B17).
Consider that formaldehyde is considered a carcinogen in occupational settings, and indeed is related to methylation (see, for example, "Biological role of formaldehyde, and cycles related to methylation, demethylation, and formaldehyde production" -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12570834 ). As you said earlier, "The methylation problem is a complex one, while some methylation is needed in all living things, the methylation is something which the body needs to keep under tight control." So, while the body manufactures it, being exposed to a sudden IV dose via killed-vaccines (which use formalin to inactivate the virus while preserving its structure) may be harmful. Fortunately, nobody has done the research to see if it is, so we can just assume it ain't! (sarcasm)
Federal District Judge Luther Bohanon who established the affidavit system for laetrile in 1977 offered his considered view of the controversy:
"Advocates of laetrile's use in cancer treatment include many highly educated and prominent doctors and scientists whose familiarity and practical experience with the substance vastly exceeds that of their detractors. To deem such advocacy 'quackery' distorts the serious issues posed by laetrile's prominence and requires disregarding considerable expertise mustered on the drug's behalf.
"While the record reveals an impressive consensus among the nation's large medical and cancer-fighting institutions as to laetrile's ineffectualness, a disconcerting dearth of experience with the substance by such detractors is revealed...
"The current debate is fierce. The issue appears largely unresolved as to laetrile's true effectiveness, in large part because FDA has prevented adequate testing on humans.... It is only when the substance is openly used, and its results carefully observed and fully reported that this controversy will be resolved."
It turns out that the few studies that are often used as "proof" of B17's alleged ineffectiveness or dangerousness have been either inadequate, or extremely poor (
www.whale.to/c/laetrile.html ). Also, it is most effective when administered as part of a treatment protocol, including vitamins A, C & D, and enzyme therapy. Like I said, there is no single "cure" for cancer. But your brushoff of B17 is based on no experience or expertise whatsoever, and your charge that Krebs and others are "Quacks" is logically, scientifically, and medically invalid.
23 Feb 2012, 8:22 am
