Pages

Showing posts with label Tumour suppressor/fighter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tumour suppressor/fighter. Show all posts

Saturday, 22 June 2019

Game-changing cancer drugs which can attack all tumours will be fast-tracked by NHS

Game-changing cancer drugs which can attack all types of tumour will be fast-tracked by the NHS, the head of the health service will today announce.
A computer illustration of cancer cells
A revolutionary class of treatments could offer hope to thousands of patients in cases which were previously untreatable CREDIT: SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY
Simon Stevens will say that a revolutionary class of treatments - known as “tumour agnostic” drugs - could offer hope to thousands of patients in cases which were previously untreatable.
They work by targeting tumours according to their genetic make-up, rather than where they originate in the body.
As a result, they can be used to treat a range of type of diseases - shrinking tumours in up to three quarters of cancers tested.
Today Mr Stevens will tell a conference of NHS leaders in Manchester that preparations are underway to ensure the next generation of treatment can be quickly made available to patients.
Two of the first drugs are expected to be licenced later this year, and could be approved by NHS rationing bodies soon after, depending on price negotiations.
Earlier detection and treatment of cancer is a central part of the long-term plan for the health service.
Mr Stevens is expected to tell the NHS Confederation conference: “This exciting new breakthrough in cancer treatment is the latest example of how the NHS can lead the way in the new era of personalised cancer care.
“The benefits for patients, in particular children, of being able to treat many different types of cancers with one drug is potentially huge, helping them to lead longer, healthier lives.”
It follows a decision last year to make England the first country in Europe to fund another pioneering treatment, called Car-T, which programmes the body to attack rogue cells, for children.
Today Mr Stevens will say that children should also be among the first to benefit from the new generation of drugs, which target tumours with the genetic variation which accelerates growth.
With such treatments, testing the tumour’s genes or other molecular features assists in deciding which treatments may be best, regardless of where the cancer is located.
The advances are possible because of the NHS national genomic medicine and testing service, launched last year, which allows patients to be tested to see who can benefit from access to targeted treatment, often when no other options are available.
The genetic flaw - known as neurotropic tyrosine receptor kinase, or NTRK - is most commonly found in rare cancers such as  salivary tumours and infantile fibrosarcoma but is also in low levels in more common cancers.
Two drugs - Larotrectinib, produced by Bayer, and entrectinib, from Roche, are expected to be the first drugs to be licenced, later this year.
Health officials said around 850 patients a year could benefit from the frontrunners while many thousands a year are eventually expected to benefit from other treatments on the horizon.
The drugs work by blocking the NTRK enzyme, effectively shrinking the tumour. Early clinical trials showed the tumour responded in two thirds to three quarters of the cancers tested.
Existing cancer drugs need to be approved by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for each individual type of cancer they treat such as breast or colon cancer.
However, when approved, the new drugs would be available to treat all types of tumour without individual approval.
Mr Stevens will urge health leaders to prepare to introduce the drugs, ahead of meetings next week about how to ensure speedy adoption of the drugs.
Today he will also say that manufacturers need to set fair and affordable prices for the treatments. In recent months, a number of deals have been agreed between the NHS and manufacturers, allowing the rollout of drugs for rare disease, but they remain at loggerheads about the pricing of a treatment for cystic fibrosis, which the NHS refuses to fund.
Mr Stevens will today say: “Preparations are underway to make sure the NHS can adopt these next generation of treatments, but manufacturers need to set fair and affordable prices so treatments can be made available to those who need them.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/18/game-changing-cancer-drugs-can-attack-tumours-will-fast-tracked/






Friday, 17 August 2018

Antitumor immune function in liver and gut microbiome - MUST READ

NCI study finds gut microbiome can control antitumor immune function in liver

  • Posted: May 24, 2018






3D illustration of gut bacteria.
Credit: iStock
Healthwise

Scientists have found a connection between bacteria in the gut and antitumor immune responses in the liver. Their study, published online May 24 in Science, was led by researchers in the Center for Cancer Research (CCR) at the National Cancer Institute (NCI). 
It showed that bacteria found in the gut of mice affect the liver’s antitumor immune function. The findings have implications for understanding the mechanisms that lead to liver cancer and for therapeutic approaches to treat them. NCI is part of the National Institutes of Health. 
“What we found using different tumor models is that if you treat mice with antibiotics and thereby deplete certain bacteria, you can change the composition of immune cells of the liver, affecting tumor growth in the liver,” said Tim Greten, M.D., of NCI’s CCR, who led the study. “This is a great example of how what we learn from basic research can give us insight into cancer and possible treatments.” 
The microbiome is the collection of bacteria and other microorganisms that live in or on the body. In humans, the greatest proportion of the body’s total microbiome is in the gut. Despite extensive research into the relationship between the gut microbiome and cancer, the role of gut bacteria in the formation of liver cancer has remained poorly understood. 
To investigate whether gut bacteria affect the development of tumors in the liver, Dr. Greten and his team carried out a series of experiments with mice. They used three mouse models of liver cancer, and found that when they depleted gut bacteria using an antibiotic “cocktail,” the mice that had the antibiotics developed fewer and smaller liver tumors and had reduced metastasis to the liver.
The investigators next studied the immune cells in the liver to understand how the depletion of gut bacteria suppressed tumor growth in the liver of the antibiotic-treated mice. Antibiotic treatment increased the numbers of a type of immune cell called NKT cells in the livers of the mice. Further experiments showed that, in all three mouse models, the reduction in liver tumor growth that resulted from antibiotic treatment was dependent on these NKT cells. Next, they found that the accumulation of the NKT cells in the liver resulted from an increase in the expression of a protein called CXCL16 on cells that line the inside of capillaries in the liver.
“We asked ourselves, why do mice treated with antibiotics have more CXCL16 production in these endothelial cells?” Dr. Greten said. “That was the critical point, when we found that bile acids can control the expression of CXCL16. We then did further studies, and found that if we treat mice with bile acids, we can actually change the number of NKT cells in the liver, and thereby the number of tumors in the liver.”
Bile acids are formed in the liver and help break down fats during digestion.
Finally, the investigators found that one bacterial species, Clostridium scindens, controls metabolism of bile acids in the mouse gut—and ultimately CXCL16 expression, NKT cell accumulation, and tumor growth in the liver.
Dr. Greten explained that while many studies have shown an association between gut bacteria and immune response, this study is significant in that it identifies not just a correlation, but a complete mechanism of how bacteria affect the immune response in liver. In the same study, the researchers found that bile acids also control the expression of the CXCL16 protein in the liver of humans and wrote that, though these results are preliminary, the novel mechanism described in this study could potentially apply to cancer patients. 
This press release describes a basic research finding. Basic research increases our understanding of human behavior and biology, which is foundational to advancing new and better ways to prevent, diagnose, and treat disease. Science is an unpredictable and incremental process—each research advance builds on past discoveries, often in unexpected ways. Most clinical advances would not be possible without the knowledge of fundamental basic research. 
About the Center for Cancer Research (CCR): CCR comprises nearly 250 teams conducting basic, translational, and clinical research in the NCI intramural program—an environment supporting innovative science aimed at improving human health. CCR’s clinical program is housed at the NIH Clinical Center—the world’s largest hospital dedicated to clinical research. For more information about CCR and its programs, visit ccr.cancer.gov
About the National Cancer Institute (NCI): NCI leads the National Cancer Program and NIH’s efforts to dramatically reduce the prevalence of cancer and improve the lives of cancer patients and their families, through research into prevention and cancer biology, the development of new interventions, and the training and mentoring of new researchers. For more information about cancer, please visit the NCI website at cancer.gov or call NCI’s Contact Center (formerly known as the Cancer Information Service) at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237). 
About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation's medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit nih.gov.



Tuesday, 5 June 2018

Breast cancer: Common drugs may halt post-surgery relapse

After cancer surgery — particularly for breast cancer — many patients experience an early tumor recurrence. It is not clear why, but new research suggests that common pain-reducing, anti-inflammatory drugs may prevent that from happening.
Published
  
generic white tablets
The answer to early relapse after breast cancer surgery may be closer than we think.
In many cancer types — especially in the case of breast cancer — surgery is often preferred when it comes to removing primary tumors.
However, the recurrence of cancer after surgery is not an uncommon occurrence.
Some who have gone through surgery are at an increased risk of early recurrence, although the precise reasons why are currently unclear.
In a new study whose results have been published in the journal Science Translational Medicine, first author Jordan Krall and colleagues — from the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, MA, and other institutions — have begun to uncover some clues and investigate how these cases of early relapse might be avoided.
"A partial explanation for these outcomes has become clear: in as many as one third of patients diagnosed with localized breast cancer, carcinoma cells have already disseminated to distant anatomical sites at the time of initial diagnosis," the authors explain in their paper.
Until surgery, such tumor cells may remain in a state of limbo, with their harmful potential blocked by the body's immune response.
"In a subset of patients, however," the authors say, "a small fraction of such clinically inapparent cancer cells ultimately renew proliferation and spawn life-threatening metastases [or secondary tumors]."
However, Krall and team's recent study on mice has revealed a ray of hope in the shape of a type of commonly available drug used to fight pain and reduce inflammation: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).
NSAIDs seem to reduce the risk of early post-operatory relapse in the patients to whom they are administered during surgery.
"This represents the first causative evidence of surgery having this kind of systemic response," says Krall. "Surgery is essential for treating a lot of tumors, especially breast cancer. But there are some side effects of surgery, just as there are side effects to any treatment."
"We're starting to understand what appears to be one of those potential side effects, and this could lead to supportive treatment alongside [...] surgery that could mitigate some of those effects."
Jordan Krall


https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/321505.php?_1

Sunday, 3 June 2018

Antifungal drug kills dormant colorectal cancer cells


Colorectal cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed type of cancer in the United States. Though various treatments are available for it, certain tumor cells are therapy-resistant. Now, research suggests that an antifungal drug may be effective against these persistent cells.
 Published

picture of itraconazole capsules
Can itraconazole, an antifungal drug, eliminate therapy-resistant cancer cells and halt tumor progression?
The drug itraconazole is typically used in the treatment of fungal infections.
These can include certain types of vaginal yeast (vulvovaginal candidiasis) and fungal infections on the hands and feet (Tinea pedis and Tinea manuum).
But researchers from the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute have suggested a brand new use for this substance — namely, as a treatment that is able to eliminate dormant tumor cells in colorectal cancer.
This is one of the most common cancer types in the U.S., and an estimated 140,250 people will learn that they have this disease in 2018, according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI).
"One of the biggest challenges in treating any cancer is the diversity of different cells within the same tumor," explains co-lead author Dr. Simon Buczacki, who participated in the new study investigating the effect of itraconazole on dormant colorectal cancer cells.
In this study, he continues, the team "targeted a type of cell that lies asleep within bowel tumors, remaining unresponsive to treatment and putting the patient at risk of their cancer coming back."
In experiments conducted on mice, Dr. Buczacki and team found that the antifungal drug may be able to trigger the death of a type of colorectal cancer cell typically immune to treatment.
These tumor cells are found in a state of inactivity, or "dormancy," so they do not respond to the usual therapies, such as chemotherapy, that target and destroy active cancer cells.
So, even as a treatment is effective in destroying most malignant cells, these dormant units will remain unaffected, putting the person at risk of having a recurrence of the cancer later on.

Itraconazole halts tumor progression

In the study — the findings of which have been published in the Journal of Experimental Medicine— the researchers worked with cancer tumors grown in mice models of colorectal cancer.
First of all, they focused on identifying which signaling pathways were involved in controlling cell dormancy in the case of cancer tumors. They saw that, for colorectal cancer, there are two: Wnt and "hedgehog" pathways.
Then, they tested the effectiveness of various drugs on these two pathways, and it was then that they noticed itraconazole's therapeutic potential.
Dr. Buczacki and team discovered that itraconazole interfered with the Wnt pathway, which led to the elimination of the dormant cells and blocked the growth of the cancer tumor.
"What's interesting is that this drug seems to kick both dormant and non-dormant cells into action," notes Dr. Buczacki.
"It forces cells back into a short cycle of growth," he explains, "before slamming on an irreversible 'stop' button, entering a permanent standstill that's known as senescence."
Following these promising results, the team would eventually like to test the effectiveness of this drug in clinical trials, on patients with colorectal cancer at an advanced stage.
Another step would be to ascertain whether itraconazole would be more effective on its own, or used in combination therapy, administered alongside other drugs.
Prof. Greg Hannon — the director of the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute — comments on the discovery, calling the research an "innovative study" that "has taken a step toward addressing one of the biggest challenges in cancer research."
"The presence of drug-resistant, dormant tumor cells is a problem in many types of cancer," he says.
"If we find ways to target these cells in bowel cancer, it might provide insights into tackling the problem of dormant tumor cells more broadly."
Prof. Greg Hannon



https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/322009.php

Friday, 25 May 2018

Yes, laetrile really works

The FDA has effectively shut down the purchase of Laetrile in the U.S. — even though it’s a perfectly safe and natural supplement that could save those 475,905 lives per year.
By Lee Euler / June 16, 2010


“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States: Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
(One of the greatest rights ever given to a people — From the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, 1868)
Suppose you discovered that a whopping 475,905 people in the U.S. alone die needlessly every year, in a manner so sinister it could be classified as criminal deception.1
You’d call that mass murder if it were intentional, right?
Such is the story surrounding Laetrile, one of the most popular and effective alternative cancer treatments — also known as purified B17, Amygdalin, or nitrilosides.
The FDA has effectively shut down the purchase of Laetrile in the U.S. — even though it’s a perfectly safe and natural supplement that could save those 475,905 lives per year.
Continued below…
You can make yourself cancer-proof with laetrile-rich foods
Members of a certain tribal people are almost totally cancer-free. But when they move from their native land and change their diet, they get cancer just like anyone else.
My good friend Ty Bollinger says it’s because they eat a diet rich in laetrile. Specifically, they grow apricots on a large scale. In their country, says Ty, a man’s wealth is measured by the number of apricot trees he owns. And — most important — they eat the pits, which are just about the richest source of laetrile you can find. That makes these folks a bit unusual. And it looks like it makes them cancer-proof.
You can buy apricot pits over the Internet, but this life-giving substance is present in hundreds of other foods, too. If you’ve already got cancer, you can receive laetrile (also called B-17) intravenously (IV) at a clinic that Ty recommends. He gives you the full story in one of the best books about alternative cancer treatments ever written. Click here and see why this valuable volume belongs on your bookshelf. Then get going and make yourself cancer-proof!
Rediscovered After 3,400 Years
Oral traditions from ancient China suggest that doctors used a highly concentrated substance from the pits of apricots and other fruits 3,500 years ago to treat tumors. It was first documented in writing 2,000 years ago.
Laetrile exists in large amounts in apricot kernels, comprising 2-3% of the kernel. It’s also found in the kernels of many other fruits, and a host of other foods such as:
1) Plums
2) Cherry seeds
3) Peach kernels
4) Nectarines
5) Apple seeds
6) Lima beans
7) Chick peas
8) Elderberry wine
9) Bean sprouts
10) Millet sprouts
11) Sorghum molasses
12) All members of the raspberry family
13) Macadamia nuts
14) Bamboo sprouts
15) Cashews
16) Buckwheat
17) Blueberries
18) Blackberries
19) Strawberries
All fruit seeds contain healthy organic cyanide — not ‘inorganic’ cyanide, which is deadly. More on that in a moment…
The primitive diet was very rich in nitrilosides, because people ate the entire fruit or grain kernel, including the seeds, which contained as much as 2% or more nitrilosides. Today it’s typical to eat only the flesh and discard everything else.
Nitriloside was “rediscovered” in 1920 by California physician Ernest Krebs. His son Dr. Ernest Krebs, Jr., named it “Laetrile” in 1952 after they discovered a connection between cancer and nutritional deficiency.
Their studies showed that a sufficient intake of Laetrile (or hydrocyanic acid in its natural form) was selectively toxic to cancer cells.
In the early 70s, Loyola University biologist Dr. Harold Manner ran a study on mice using a combination of enzymes, vitamin A and Laetrile. As reported in his book, Death of Cancer2
“After 6-8 days, an ulceration appeared at the tumor site. Within the ulceration was a pus-like fluid. An examination of this fluid revealed dead malignant cells. The tumor gradually underwent complete regression in 75 of the experimental animals. This represented 89.3% of the total group.”
Vitamin B17 is one “smart” vitamin!
On a molecular level, it has four units — 2 units of glucose, 1 unit of benzaldehyde, and 1 unit of cyanide. The cyanide unit is “locked” together with the other three units so it cannot be released on its own.
When B17 comes into contact with normal cells, a protective enzyme called rhodanase neutralizes the cyanide molecule in Laetrile on contact. On the contrary, cancer cells have norhodanase. Instead, they have another enzyme, beta-glucosidase that specifically releases the cyanide, which in turn poisons the cancer cells.
So only cancer cells possess this key that unlocks the cyanide — a process known as selective toxicity.
Those Who Do NOT Get Cancer…
G. Edward Griffin, who wrote the excellent book World Without Cancer3 , indicates that the cultures around the world that eat the most B17 in their diets are the same groups that can boast an extremely low incidence of cancer.
Take, for example, the “Hunzakuts” or “Hunza” people of the Himalayas. They have a reputation for being one of the longest-lived people in the world, often living from 100 to 120 years — with great health and vitality. They didn’t know cancer before being introduced to modern civilization.
While it would be a mistake to attribute their healthy lifestyle to just one thing, the fact is that their diet has been historically high in vitamin B17 — possibly the highest in the world — because apricot trees are their main crop. The wealth of a Hunzakut man is measured by how many apricot trees he owns. And dried apricot seeds contain one of the highest sources of B17 on earth. It is not uncommon for a Hunzakut to eat 30 to 50 apricot seeds per day as a snack.
Eskimos have also traditionally been free from cancer. You would correctly assume their diet to be very poor in fresh veggies, fruit, and seeds. But grasses are typically good sources of B17, which the Eskimos receive through eating caribou, reindeer, and other grazing animals.
Both the Hunzas and Eskimos succumbed to cancer once they adopted Western eating habits.
Today’s standard American diet is weak in B17-rich fresh fruits and veggies, nuts and seeds. In addition, most meat comes from grain-fed animals, instead of the more nutritionally sound grass-fed animals.
If Laetrile is selectively toxic to cancer cells, and prevalent in the diets of cultures with almost no cancer incidence, why don’t people know about it?
Research, Cure and Cover-Up…
Most people have never heard about Laetrile because of the massive cover-up by the FDA and pharmaceutical industry.
Regardless, there have been many tests on Laetrile over the past 30 to 40 years, including a major 5-year study at the prestigious cancer research department of Sloan Memorial Kettering Cancer Research (SMKCR) Center in New York.
In 1972, SMKCR asked its senior cancer researcher Dr. Kanematsu Sugiura — with more than 60 years experience in cancer research — to conduct tests over a five-year period from 1972-1977. He’d been with Sloan Kettering since 1917.
Dr. Sugiura’s work was trusted and his honesty was beyond dispute. He had published hundreds of research papers. The head of Sloan Kettering’s lab-testing division even wrote:
“Few if any names in cancer research are as widely known as Kanematsu Segiura’s…. Possibly the highest 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 Segiura publishes, we know we do not have to repeat the study, for we would obtain the same results he has reported’.”
Dr. Sugiura found Laetrile to be highly effective against cancers of all types.
At the conclusion of the trials, on June 15, 1977 the SMKCR released a press statement. Over 100 reporters and half a dozen film crews from leading TV stations were assembled to hear the long-awaited official verdict on Laetrile from the world’s most prestigious cancer research center.
Physicians with impeccable credentials shared the platform. Dr. Robert Good began to speak, condemning Laetrile and its use. He then passed the microphone to Dr. Stock, who had previously praised Segiura’s work. Stock droned on about the finer details of the testing… until it became evident to all that Dr. Sugiura was not to be given an opportunity to speak.
Suddenly a journalist shouted from the crowd, “Dr. Kenamatsu Sugiura, do you stick by your belief that Laetrile stops the spread of cancer?”
He replied, “I stick.”
Dr. Sugiura said,
“The most interesting part is metastases. Secondary cancer growth to another location. When this mammary tumor grows to about two centimeters in diameter or more, about 80% develop lung metastases. But with treatment with Laetrile/Amygdalin, it’s cut down to about 20%.”
Deliberately Designed to Fail…
The medical authorities didn’t like it and determined to prove Sugiura wrong. His data had to be buried.
But other researchers had also obtained the same positive results. Dr. Lloyd Schloen, a biochemist at Sloan-Kettering, had included proteolytic enzymes in his injections and reported a 100% cure rate among albino mice.
So what was Sloan-Kettering’s plan? Change the testing protocols and Laetrile amounts to ensure failure. Little surprise then that they failed… and that’s what they reported.
Dr. Sugiura refused to roll over and play dead.
“I see what I see!” he declared. He was hounded for doing so.
Dr. Ralph Moss, head of public relations at Sloan-Kettering at the time, protested the cover-up. He blew the whistle on the lies told by Sloan-Kettering about the Laetrile trials. He was fired the next day for “failing to carry out my most basic job responsibility, which means to lie when your boss tells you to”.
Later, minutes of a meeting of top Sloan officials obtained via the Freedom of Information Act revealed that Sloan-Kettering officials knew the effectiveness of Amygdalin was obvious.
The minutes read, “…Sloan-Kettering is not enthusiastic about studying Amygdalin but would like to study cyanide releasing drugs.”
Sloan-Kettering wanted a man-made patentable chemical to mimic the qualities found in Amygdalin. That’s where the money is.
If a very effective cancer treatment or cure were found in the lowly apricot seed, it would spell economic disaster for the cancer industry.
Laetrile has also been studied and used around the world. Hans Nieper, M.D. (Germany), Ernesto Contreras, M.D. (Mexico), and Manuel Navarro, M.D. (Philippines) were three early practitioners and researchers of Laetrile. All three achieved outstanding results.
When Philip E. Binzel, Jr., M.D. learned of their work, he was so impressed he began practicing nutritional therapy with his own cancer patients. After 20 years of Laetrile treatments, he wrote a book about his experiences.
It should be noted that Laetrile was never meant to be a stand-alone cancer treatment like a drug… but to be used in combination with supplements, diet and enzymes.
Dr Binzel’s book Alive and Well documents numerous stories of those who went on to survive and thrive after Laetrile treatments, and many of the stories can also be read at http://www.cancure.org/cancer_victors.htm.
Tests revealed dramatic survival rates
After 18 years, Dr. Binzel analyzed the success of his treatments. He separated his patients into primary cancer and metastatic cancer groups… and then compared their outcomes to the American Cancer Society’s outcomes.
The primary cancer group had 180 patients with 30 types of cancer. After 18 years, 87.3 percent of these did NOT die of their cancer. Even assuming that the seven patients who died of unknown causes may have died from cancer, he still showed an amazing 83.3% long-term recovery!4
At the same time, the American Cancer Society (ACS) officially claimed that with conventional treatment including early detection and treatment for cancers that had not yet metastasized, “…85% of the patients WILL die from their disease within 5 years.”5
I think I’d bet on Dr. Binzel’s odds, not those of the ACS!
In his group of metastasized cancer patients, after 18 years 70.4% did not die, reduced to a (still) whopping 62.1% when he conceded those who died of unknown causes.
Binzel’s results are incredible when compared to ACS statistics, which show that only one person in every thousand with metastasized cancer (0.1%)will survive five years if treated with conventional means.6
This is true reason to hope…
The Two Fronts of the Disinformation Campaign
Detractors claim that Laetrile is: (1) Too toxic because it contains cyanide, and (2) Not effective in treating cancer.
The “toxic” argument is absurd. You ingest it every time you eat lima beans, bean sprouts, most seeds and nuts, berries, millet and more. And some of the healthiest people on earth eat diets high in Laetrile. What’s more, vitamin B12 — which is sold as a supplement — also contains the same type of cyanide molecule as B17.
The story above about the Sloan Kettering research casts plenty of doubt on the idea Laetrile is “ineffective.” Ralph Moss, the main source for what happened there, is a pillar of integrity, and he’s not a wide-eyed worshipper at the altar of alternative treatments. He’s much more insistent on good scientific evidence than most people who write about the subject.
Further, Griffin reports in his book World Without Cancer about studies at the Mayo Clinic that were deliberately designed to fail and not conducted according to protocol, so the results would “prove” that Laetrile is ineffective.
How to Get Started with Laetrile…
Due to the suppression of Laetrile treatments, you can’t just walk into a doctor’s office and get treated in America. Physicians have been shut down and hauled to jail for prescribing Laetrile.
So Laetrile has been pushed out of the U.S. and into Mexico. Some U.S. docs may still give Laetrile by IV (intravenously), but they probably won’t publicize it.
If you want to receive treatment in the States, the only option is to ask around at various alternative cancer treatment clinics to find out who offers it.
If you want to take “home-style” Laetrile by mouth, you can still purchase apricot seeds on the Internet, but it’s becoming more difficult. Anyway, my sources indicate that eating the seeds is effective as a preventive but less so if you’ve got cancer. IV Laetrile is the most powerful delivery method if you’ve got cancer.
Many clinics in Mexico offer Laetrile or B17, often stated on their websites. As always, check on the credibility of the doctor or clinic, and try to speak with other patients before committing to a regimen.
We publish a guide to Mexican cancer clinics called Cancer Defeated, and I strongly urge you to get your hands on this Special Report if you’re thinking of going to Mexico to get laetrile treatment. We’re coming out with an updated edition called Adios, Cancer.If you buy the older edition that we have in stock now, we’ll automatically send you a FREE copy of the new edition when it comes out. This is a great offer (if I do say so myself). CLICK HERE to get Cancer Defeated AND a free copy of Adios, Cancer in a month or two.
As mentioned earlier, Laetrile is intended to be part of a complete protocol of diet, enzymes, exercise and supplements. You should use Laetrile ONLY under the supervision of a medical professional.
For example, zinc is required for Laetrile to do its job. Ditto for vitamin C. Vitamin A interferes with Laetrile. A build-up of vitamins, enzymes and proper diet is necessary before starting Laetrile. A full stomach weakens the effect of Laetrile. Et cetera.
It’s not a do-it-yourself option.
Also, Laetrile stands for laevo-rotatory mandelonitrile beta-diglucoside. The “laevo” part references a purified form of B17 that turns polarized light in a left-turning direction. Dr. Ralph Moss states that the form of Laetrile patented by the Krebs, father and son, was purified to contain only this left-turning (laevo) form. Apparently Dr. Krebs, Jr. believed that only the left-turning form was effective against cancer. So it’s wise to check the purity of your practitioner’s Laetrile.
Robert Atkins, M.D., the “Diet Revolution” guru, said, “Amygdalin appears to neutralize the oxidative cancer-promoting compounds such as free radicals… It’s just one more key component keeping cancer from growing or spreading. Contrary to what people have said about Laetrile… it should be considered an effective, entirely safe treatment for all types of cancer.”