Pages

Showing posts with label Vitamin B17. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vitamin B17. Show all posts

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.”

Sunday, 12 February 2017

What lies in our diets – Part 1

The impact of modern fake news as it relates to the recent American presidential election is something that struck a lot of people as unconscionable and ridiculous – but try ...



What lies in our diets – Part 1
What lies in your diet? Do you feed yourself wholesome, digestible ‘bites’ or swallow pseudoscience out to make you part with your money? Photo: AFP/Istock


The impact of modern fake news as it relates to the recent American presidential election is something that struck a lot of people as unconscionable and ridiculous – but try telling that to the misinformation experts or the new president who concocted all sorts of lies for their own profit or ego.

Fake news isn’t new and has been around practically forever – as examples: to promote Christianity, Jesus was constantly misrepresented as a white man (this still continues even today), and politicians, businesses and espionage agencies have always used subtly managed misinformation.

Regardless of politically-influenced fake news, the world has also been ploughing through another barrage of contemporary fake news for decades – and this heap of plausible half-truths, aptly termed as pseudoscience, can influence the diets, medications and health of millions.

Pseudoscience


Let’s start by asking why pseudoscience is often believed. There are several answers, all of them relatively simple, but mainly it is because pseudoscience targets and validates people’s desperation, fears, personal beliefs or aspirations.

Other reasons are ignorance, sheer gullibility, lack of objectivity, inability to think critically, laziness and stuff like that.

There is also the Dunning-Kruger Effect where people with inadequate knowledge develop a delusional superiority about subjects they do not understand – this is possibly a worthy subject for another article.

The main intention of pseudo-science, as with fake news, is to invoke either hope, outrage or fear so that people would become less sceptical and more inclined to believe in the following waves of pseudoscience – the second, more sinister aim is usually to sell people something they do not need.

The exact origins of these odious lumps of pseudoscience are not always obvious – once a pseudoscience wave starts, hundreds of websites may suddenly appear in google searches and even your social media might get flooded.

The only certainty about most pseudoscience is that it is a strategy to make money, especially from gullible or desperate people.

The cosmetic industry is one riddled with pseudoscience – there are creams with “diamond peptides”, for example, which cost small fortunes even though there is clearly no such thing for peptides are short biological chains of amino acids whereas a diamond is pure carbon and the two cannot react as there are no free hydrogen bonds in diamonds.

Whereas the food industry is often keen to hide various artificial ingredients in its labelling, the cosmetic industry seems to love labelling all sorts of spurious meaningless items added in tiny proportions, especially if they have complex or fake (self-invented) chemical names.

Just be informed that most cosmetic creams are based on simple emollients which are either oil- or water-based and ridiculously cheap to produce.

Bad science


Pseudoscience is often confused with bad science – but there is a significant difference. A couple of cases of bad science are the Eskimo diet and its alleged efficacy against heart disease, and also the supposed link between ingesting saturated fats and heart disease.
Both these subjects were covered recently in this column and the connections were found to be erroneous and examples of confirmation bias and imprecise scientific analysis.

Basically, they were examples of less than brilliant science, but somewhat forgivable given the technology and the data available at the time.

However, with pseudoscience, the intent from the outset is to suggest something special, a golden benefit, a wondrous remedy which is hidden and outside the remit of “normal” science.

A classic example of pseudoscience is the marketing of “ionised” water or alkaline water or alkaline “ionised” water and their related machinery which can cost over US$3,000 (RM13,000) each.

It doesn’t matter how they call it – the facts are that water (unless it is distilled) is ALWAYS ionised and alkalinity is (unnecessarily) introduced via hydroxides catalysed from mineral salts in the water or introduced by the machines themselves via packets of salt.

I have written about these machines before – the only perceivable advantage is that people would drink more water and hydrate themselves better after spending so much money on them.

But there is no scientifically verifiable data that these simple, cheap, easily-produced, overpriced contraptions and their alkaline waters have any health benefits.

This vitamin called ‘B17’


One particularly odious branch of pseudoscience targets desperate people who have, or fear, cancers or other major illnesses – there are so many of these “alternative treatments” that they are investigative items for science researchers dedicated to debunking them.

However, as a little example, we can briefly dissect a surprising and very recent one shared by friends on social media. You may have come across pills or treatments involving “vitamin B17” for curing and preventing cancers.

The name itself is problematic for there is no such thing as “vitamin B17”, at least, not in medical nomenclature. Laetrile is the commercial name for “vitamin B17” and is a synthetic form of a natural compound called amygdalin which is found in the raw seeds of some nuts and fruits.

Amygdalin is a glycoside (a compound which has a sugar attached via a glycosidic bond), had been discovered by French scientists in 1830 and had been trialled as a cancer treatment in 1892 in Germany – it was found to be too toxic and discarded.



You may have come across pills or treatments involving “vitamin B17” for curing and preventing cancers; there is no such thing as “vitamin B17”, at least, not in medical nomenclature.
You may have come across pills or treatments involving ‘vitamin B17′ for
curing and preventing cancers; there is no such thing as ‘vitamin B17′,
at least, not in medical nomenclature.

The reasons for the toxicity was not discovered until later – it was due to the action of a family of enzymes called glucosidases on amygdalin, resulting in two further compounds called gentiobiose and mandelonitrile.

The problem compound is mandelonitrile when it is further hydrolysed by the body into benzaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide – it was well-known that hydrogen cyanide in relatively small doses simply kills mammalian cells, including both cancerous and normal cells, resulting in poor health and eventually death.

As an aside, the words “amygdala” is Latin for almonds and “mandel” is German for almonds – and bitter almonds contain significant quantities of amygdalin. However, don’t worry – bitter almonds are never sold in the shops simply because they are too poisonous. It is plausible that some plants evolved amygdalin as a deterrent against mammals eating their seeds.

Regardless of the actual chemical reactions in the body to laetrile and amygdalin, it is a cheap compound to produce – and deceitful or misguided people (who may not really understand any science) are still peddling the stuff today as a remedy for cancer.

The story of laetrile is interesting for this compound is probably the foundation stone of modern “alternative treatments”. It precipitated the eventual formation of the American “Committee for Freedom of Choice in Medicine” (CFCM) in 1972 – an organisation dedicated to promoting and marketing questionable cures for cancers and other serious diseases under the guise of freedom of choice.

The convoluted tale of how laetrile became a cancer treatment started long ago in 1902. Based on observations of placenta tissues through a microscope, Scottish embryologist John Beard developed the idea that cancer cells and cells developed during pregnancy called trophoblasts are one and the same thing.

He further suggested that trophoblasts were destroyed by an enzyme called chymotrypsin secreted by the pancreas – and if not enough chymotrypsin was produced to kill off and manage trophoblasts, cancers would form and grow.

In 1945, “Doctor” Ernst Theodore Krebs, Jr. founded the John Beard Memorial Foundation to develop and apply Beard’s ideas. When the initial experiments did not work out well, Krebs decided that a compound developed by his father, laetrile, was more effective than chymotrypsin.

He then patented laetrile, and to boost his claims for the compound, unilaterally announced laetrile as “vitamin B17”, claiming that a deficiency in this “vitamin” is the cause of cancer.

You can still read these same claims restated daily on the internet. You should also know that Krebs had failed medical school and also flunked science courses in other colleges – his “doctor of science” degree was from a defunct bible college in Oklahoma which had no science department. And in a final piece of irony, the word “krebs” in German actually means cancer.

Regardless, some doctors at the time saw laetrile as a way to becoming instant cancer treatment experts – there was poor medical regulation during that period in the United States.

One such doctor was Dr John Richardson, a GP with no specialist training and a nondescript reputation. However, his practice suddenly took off when he became a “cancer specialist” offering laetrile treatment – his declared personal income went from US$10K in 1971 to US$173K in 1973, eventually reaching several million dollars by 1976 when he finally lost his medical licence.

By the 1970s, the role of amygdalin and laetrile in the creation of hydrogen cyanide in the body was known, eventually resulting in the arrest of Dr Richardson for his illegal treatments (though he was not convicted due to legal technicalities).

By then, there were more casuistic people involved in the “cancer cure” business and after the arrest of Dr Richardson, they founded the Committee for Freedom of Choice in Cancer Therapy, later becoming the CFCM – they had realised a lot of money can be made from desperate, terminally-ill patients and wanted to give very sick people the choice of how they can spend their money.

It appears that several similar shady confederations have existed ever since then, promoting untested and unreliable products in waves of media self-marketing – this happens mostly on the internet these days.

As a footnote, in 1980 the US National Cancer Institute undertook a second trial using laetrile – this time it was a full clinical trial and out of over 170 patients, not one was cured or even stabilised long-term. Those that did not die during the trial had increased tumours, as also observed in patients without any treatment.

Laetrile is now banned in both the United States and the European Union as a cancer treatment. A 1981 paper published in an oncology journal reviewed the history and pharmacology of laetrile and concluded that it is “the slickest, most sophisticated, and certainly the most remunerative cancer quack promotion in medical history”.

An often quoted fallacy is that doctors and pharmaceutical companies don’t accept simple cures for diseases like cancer because they won’t make big money from it, especially if the treatments involved cheap “natural” compounds.

If that is the case, then poorer countries would be using these cheap treatments and the cancer survival rates there would be significantly better than developed Western countries.

However, where data is available, the notable trend is a higher incidence of deaths for the same cancers in the poorer countries. Also the exigencies of life in poorer countries should have forced the doctors there to use the best low-cost alternative treatments and statistics would then be readily available for how they worked on patients – however, it seems that even doctors in poor countries prefer to stay away from such alternative treatments and a plausible reason may be that these treatments have been tried and simply do not work.

This is not to say that the most expensive, newest treatments are automatically the best – there is always a degree of cost-recovery (by the pharmaceutical company) and experimentation with any new medication, so for the people who need treatment for complicated conditions, there is sometimes a (difficult) decision to make, hopefully based on the best advice from competent medical professionals.

Also it is admitted that some pharmaceutical companies intentionally overcharge outrageously – a classic case is Turing Pharmaceuticals over the drug Daraprim. Regrettably, there is not much that can be done apart from naming and shaming these excessively greedy corporate practices.

At the same time, the alternative treatment industry not long ago charged a British girl US$77,000 (RM340,000) for cancer treatments that involved intravenous transfusions of solutions of baking soda into her bloodstream – each intravenous drip costed her US$550 (RM2,450) for a cooking compound that is sold for pennies. And sadly, she died as well, after several expensive trips to the US for treatment.

The circumstances leading to her death is the subject which will be investigated further in the next part – for it has a lot to do with food and practically nothing to do with good science, despite being the basis of the diets of millions of people.

Read Part 2