General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: 'Laetrile' in science

Started by Ilsa9 · · Last activity · 5 posts · 387 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
30 July 2003
Last activity
30 July 2003
Original author
Ilsa9
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
387
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Quoted message said:

    That is a myth.
    Most Chemotherapy drugs poison people.
    Anth

    Anth, all things are toxic, given sufficient dosage. That's something
    overlooked by many folks not trained in pharmacology. Yes, chemotherapuetic
    agents are often toxic, but they are very carefully studied. Today's chemo
    drugs are much more selective than those 20 years ago.

    If Laetrile, which is cyanide, were useful, it would be given. As it is,
    Cyanide, which is more toxic than mercury (IIRC) does NOT benefit cancer
    patients, it only poisons them. If there were some reward (pallative effect or
    remission) to balance against this poisoning, then pro-arguments would make
    sense. It is no more wise to take bleach for cancer than to take cyanide.

    Oh, and as I mentioned above, Chemo gets better with the passage of time due to
    the scientific rigor imposed upon it. Studies with objective evidence continue
    to produce more efficacious treatments over time. Poorly designed and
    controlled studies do not produce these fruits.

    Quoted message said:


    "Ilsa9" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Even more interesting is the book World Without Cancer which shows how
    Laetrile was suppressed.
    And the lies and assumptions told.
    Anth

    Laetrile was "suppressed" because it poisons and kills people as opposed


    to

    Quoted message said:

    selectively poisoning cancer cells. It doesn't work.


  2. (also if Laetrile was ineffective then why are drugs being developed which
    are based around it's action?)
    Simply put Laetrile is an 'unproven' therapy.
    Anth

    "Ilsa9" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    That is a myth.
    Most Chemotherapy drugs poison people.
    Anth

    Anth, all things are toxic, given sufficient dosage. That's something
    overlooked by many folks not trained in pharmacology. Yes,


    chemotherapuetic

    Quoted message said:

    agents are often toxic, but they are very carefully studied. Today's


    chemo

    Quoted message said:

    drugs are much more selective than those 20 years ago.

    If Laetrile, which is cyanide, were useful, it would be given. As it is,
    Cyanide, which is more toxic than mercury (IIRC) does NOT benefit cancer
    patients, it only poisons them. If there were some reward (pallative


    effect or

    Quoted message said:

    remission) to balance against this poisoning, then pro-arguments would


    make

    Quoted message said:

    sense. It is no more wise to take bleach for cancer than to take cyanide.

    Oh, and as I mentioned above, Chemo gets better with the passage of time


    due to

    Quoted message said:

    the scientific rigor imposed upon it. Studies with objective evidence


    continue

    Quoted message said:

    to produce more efficacious treatments over time. Poorly designed and
    controlled studies do not produce these fruits.

    Quoted message said:


    "Ilsa9" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    >Even more interesting is the book World Without Cancer which shows how
    >Laetrile was suppressed.
    >And the lies and assumptions told.
    >Anth
    >

    Laetrile was "suppressed" because it poisons and kills people as


    opposed

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    to

    Quoted message said:

    selectively poisoning cancer cells. It doesn't work.


  3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=448892&dopt=Abstract

    Studies of amygdalin (laetrile) toxicity in rodents.

    Khandekar JD, Edelman H.

    Amygdalin (laetrile), given to Fischer 344 rats in doses of 250, 500, and
    750 mg/kg intraperitoneally daily for five days, caused mortalities of 30.8%
    44.1%, and 56.8%, respectively. The mode of death and the elevated serum
    cyanide levels in the dying animals strongly suggested cyanide poisoning as
    the cause of death. These findings seriously question the use of amygdalin
    in clinical medicine under any circumstances.

    In theory (upper and lower limits in rodents)

    250*80=20,000mg
    750*80=60,000mg (average weight of man)
    20 grammes per day of pure amygdalin should cause 30.8% mortality
    60 grammes per day of pure amygdalin should cause 56.8% mortality

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

    Acute Toxicity Through I.V. Application:

    The minimum lethal dose was not achieved in dosages up to 15,000 mg/kg/B.W.
    (or 120,000mg total dosages). The general symptoms were slight arterial
    hypotension and fleeting adipsia, which appeared after the minimum toxic
    dosage of 3,750 mg/kg/B.W.

    Subacute Intravenous Toxicity:

    There were no undesirable effects up to daily dosages of 1,000 mg/kg/B.W.
    for eight weeks.

    Chronic Intravenous Toxicity:

    Dosages up to 15 mg/kg/B.W. five days per week, for six consecutive months,
    did not cause clinical or histopathological alterations in necropsy studies
    of the exposed dogs.

    Acute Oral Toxicity:

    The minimal lethal dose was 14,318 mg/kg/B.W. and the minimum toxic dose was
    400 mg/kg/B.W. The symptoms that were observed were apathy, anorexia,
    adipsia, and loss of hair. These symptoms disappeared in less than 48 hours
    in the dogs in which AMYGDALIN was discontinued. The dog that received the
    minimum lethal dosage developed convulsions and typical cyanide poisoning
    shock which evolved into coma and death by cardiac arrest.

    Oral Toxicity:

    By calculation, some authors suggested as the minimum lethal dosage 2,000 to
    2,500 mg/kg/B.W.

    All these findings coincide with that mentioned by Otto Jacobsen in 1887,
    Davidson in 1944, and Dr. Dean Burk (National Cancer Institute of the USA)
    in 1968. "AMYGDALIN is impressively atoxic (non-toxic) from the
    pharmacological point of view," and that "Non-hydrolyzed AMYGDALIN is less
    toxic than glucose." On the other hand, our studies proved that KEMDALIN in
    dosages of 100 to 120 mg/kg/B.W. (unusual dosage for humans) by intravenous
    application corresponds to a dosage of AMYGDALIN 30 to 40 times less than
    the minimum toxic dosage in dogs and that KEMDALIN in dosages of 20 to 40
    mg/kg/B.W. orally, used in humans, is some 10 to 20 times less than the
    minimum toxic dosage, orally, in dogs.

    Note :-

    All these findings coincide with that mentioned by Otto Jacobsen in 1887,
    Davidson in 1944, and Dr. Dean Burk (National Cancer Institute of the USA)
    in 1968. "AMYGDALIN is impressively atoxic (non-toxic) from the
    pharmacological point of view,"

    i.e. a complete 'porky pie' laetrile is toxic

    Anth

  4. http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancerinfo/pdq/cam/laetrile

    The toxicity of laetrile appears to be dependent on the route of
    administration. Oral administration is associated with much greater toxicity
    than intravenous, intraperitoneal, or intramuscular injection.[1,6,14,21]
    Reviewed in [9,10,22,23] As noted previously (History section), most
    mammalian cells contain only trace amounts of the enzyme
    beta-glucosidase;[24] however, this enzyme is present in gastrointestinal
    tract bacteria and in many food plants. Reviewed in [6,9,15,25-27] Two
    studies have specifically examined the role of intestinal bacteria in the
    breakdown of orally administered amygdalin.[9,28] In one study, rats bred
    and raised under germ-free conditions and rats bred and raised under normal
    conditions were given oral amygdalin. The germ-free rats exhibited no side
    effects from the compound, and their blood concentrations of cyanide were
    indistinguishable from those of untreated rats. In contrast, many of the
    rats with normal quantities of intestinal bacteria showed signs of cyanide
    poisoning (e.g., lethargy and convulsions), and they had high levels of
    cyanide in their blood. In the second study, rats were either treated or not
    treated with the antibiotic neomycin before being given oral amygdalin.[6]
    In this study, urinary excretion of detoxified cyanide (i.e., thiocyanate)
    was measured. The amount of urinary thiocyanate was 40 times higher in rats
    that had not been given the antibiotic, indicating that more amygdalin had
    been broken down in animals with normal amounts of intestinal bacteria. In
    humans, as in rats, substantial breakdown of amygdalin occurs in the
    intestines; however, little breakdown of either intravenously or
    intramuscularly delivered amygdalin occurs in humans, with most of the
    intact compound eventually excreted in urine.[26,29]

  5. Quoted message said:


    All these findings coincide with that mentioned by Otto Jacobsen in 1887,
    Davidson in 1944, and Dr. Dean Burk (National Cancer Institute of the USA)
    in 1968. "AMYGDALIN is impressively atoxic (non-toxic) from the
    pharmacological point of view,"

    i.e. a complete 'porky pie' laetrile is toxic

    Anth

    Uh, Anth, are you aware that rats eat a lot things that are poisonous to
    humans? These aged studies do nothing to bolster the case. Isn't the most
    recent date in the study 1968? Geez, people didn't have 8-track tapes back
    then!

    Here is some acceptible information on Laetrile. It includes a pretty good
    bibliography as well.

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

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.