|World Without Cancer
This year, 350,000 Americans will die from cancer. One out of four of us will develop cancer in our lifetime. That’s over 50 million people of the United States alone. The purpose of this presentation is to show that this great human tragedy can be stopped now, entirely on the basis of existing scientific knowledge.
We’ll explore the theory that cancer, like scurvy or pellagra, is a deficiency disease aggravated by the lack of an essential food compound in modern man’s diet, and that it’s ultimate control is to be found simply in restoring this substance to our daily intake. We are not in the business of providing vitamins, food supplements or products of any kind. We’re not prescribing any course of treatment. We endorse nothing except freedom of choice. We have nothing to sell but facts.
What you are about to hear does not carry the approval of organized medicine. The Food and Drug Administration, the American Cancer Society, and the American Medical Association have labeled it fraud and quackery. The average physician, however, is less dogmatic. He’s more apt to say, “Let’s give it a try and then pass judgment.” Consequently, an increasing number of doctors all over the world now are testing and proving in their own clinics that the vitamin concept of cancer is true.
With billions of dollars spent each year on research, with other billions taken in from the cancer related sale of drugs, and with vote-hungry politicians promising ever increasing government programs, we find that today, there are more people making a living from cancer than are dying from it. If the riddle were to be solved by a simple vitamin, this gigantic commercial and political industry could be wiped out overnight. The result is that the science of cancer therapy isn’t nearly as complicated as the politics of cancer therapy.
In the past, the FDA and other agencies of government have used every means at their disposal to prevent this story from being told. They’ve arrested citizens for holding public meetings to tell others of their convictions on this subject. They’ve confiscated films and books. They even now are prosecuting doctors who apply these theories to save the lives of their own patients. With this background in mind, it may appear to be the height of folly to proceed with this presentation. But ladies and gentlemen, if the story that follows is true, as we firmly are convinced it is, then in the name of humanity someone simply has to stand up against the bureaucracy. And we are determined to do it.
History of Science:
The history of science is the history of struggle against entrenched error. Many of the worlds greatest discoveries initially were rejected by the scientific community, and those who pioneered those discoveries were ridiculed and condemned as quacks and charlatans.
Columbus was bitterly attacked for believing the earth was round.
Bruno was burned at the stake for claiming that the earth was not the center of the universe.
Galileo was imprisoned for teaching that the earth moved around the sun.
Even the Wright brothers were ridiculed and condemned for claiming that a machine could fly above the earth.
In the field of medicine:
Andreas Visalius was denounced as an imposter and heretic because of his discoveries in the field of human anatomy.
William Harvey was disgraced as a physician for believing that blood was pumped by the heart and actually moved around the body through arteries.
Ignat Semmelheis was fired from his hospital post for requiring his maternity staff to wash their hands.
Centuries ago it wasn’t unusual for entire naval expeditions to be wiped out by scurvy. Between 1600 and 1800, the casualty list of the British navy alone was over one million sailors. Medical experts at the time were baffled as they searched in vain for some kind of strange bacterium, virus, or toxin that supposedly lurked in the dark holds of ships. And yet, for hundreds of years, the cure was already known and written in the record.
In the winter of 1535 when the French explorer Jack Cartier found his ships frozen in the ice off the St. Laurence River, scurvy began to take its deadly toll. Out of a crew of 110, 25 already had died and most of the rest were so ill they weren’t expected to recover. And then, a friendly Indian showed them the simple remedy. Tree bark and needles from the white pine, both rich in ascorbic acid or vitamin C, were stirred into a drink which produced immediate improvement and swift recovery.
Upon returning to Europe, Cartier reported this incident to the medical authorities, but they were amused by such “witchdoctor cures” of ignorant savages. And they did nothing to follow it up. Yes, the cure for scurvy was known, but because of scientific arrogance it took over 200 years and cost hundreds of thousands of lives before the “medical experts” began to accept and apply this knowledge.
Finally, in 1747, John Lind, a surgeons mate in the British Navy discovered that oranges and lemons produced relief from scurvy, and recommended that the royal navy include citrus fruits in the stores of all its ships. And yet, it still took 48 more years before his recommendation was put into effect.
The 20th century has proven to be no exception to this pattern. Only a generation ago, large portions of the American southeast were decimated by the dread disease of pellagra, which was thought to be contagious, and probably caused by an as-yet-undiscovered virus.
As far back as 1914, Dr. Joseph Goldberger had proven that this condition was related to diet and later showed that it could be prevented by eating liver or yeast. But it wasn’t until the 1940’s, almost 30 years later, that the medical world fully accepted pellagra as a vitamin B deficiency.
By 1952, Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., a bio-chemist in San Francisco, had advanced the theory that cancer, like scurvy or pellagra, is not caused by some kind of mysterious bacterium, virus or toxin, but is merely a deficiency disease aggravated by the lack of an essential food compound in modern man’s diet.
He identified this compound as part of the Nitriloside family which occurs abundantly in nature in over 1200 edible plants and found virtually in every part of the world. It’s particularly prevalent in the seeds of fruits, but is also contained in grasses, maize, sorghum, millet, cassava, linseed, bitter almonds, and many other foods that generally have been deleted from the menus of modern civilization.
A “Chronic” disease is one which usually doesn’t pass away of its own accord. A “Metabolic” disease is one which rises within the body and isn’t transmittable to another person. Cancer, therefore, is defined as a “Chronic, Metabolic” disease.
Dr. Krebs has pointed out that in the entire history of medical science, there hasn’t been one chronic metabolic disease that was ever cured or prevented by drugs or mechanical manipulation of the body. In every case, the ultimate solution was found only in factors related to adequate nutrition, and he thinks that this is an important clue as to where to concentrate our scientific curiosity in the search for the better understanding of cancer.
But there are other clues as well. Before looking at the more technical aspects of Dr. Krebs theory, it’s well that we examine some of them. For example, domesticated pets often seek out certain grasses to eat even though they are adequately filled by other foods. This is particularly likely to happen if the animals are not well. It’s interesting to note that the grasses selected by instinct are Johnson grass, Tunis grass, Subin grass and others that are especially rich in Nitrilosides, or, Vitamin B17. Monkeys and other primates at the zoo when given a fresh peach or apricot will carefully pull away the sweet fleshy part, crack open the hard pit, and devour the small seed that remains. Instinct compels them to do this even though they’ve never seen that kind of fruit before. These seeds are one of the most concentrated sources of Nitrolisides to be found anywhere in nature.
Wild bears are great consumers of Nitrilosides in their natural diet. Not only do they seek out berries that are rich in this substance, but when they kill small grazing animals for their own food, instinctively they pass over the muscle portions and consume first the viscera and rumen which are filled with Nitriloside grasses.
In captivity, animals seldom are allowed to eat all the foods of their instinctive choice. In the San Diego Zoo, for example, the routine diet for bears, although adequate in volume and nutritious in many other respects, is almost totally devoid of Nitrilosides. In one grotto alone over a six year period, five bears died of cancer. It was generally speculated by the experts that a virus had been the cause. Now it’s highly significant that one never finds cancer in the carcasses of wild animals killed in the hunt. These animals contract the disease only when they are domesticated by man and forced to eat the foods that he provides and the scraps from his table.
Dr. George M. Briggs, professor of nutrition at the University of California, has said, “The typical American diet is a national disaster. If I fed it to pigs or cows without adding vitamins or other supplements, I could wipe out the livestock industry. A brief look at the American diet tells the story. Grocery shelves now are lined with high carbohydrate foods that have been processed, refined, synthesized, artificially flavored, and loaded with chemical preservatives. Some manufacturers boast about how little food there is in their product.
Millet once was the nations staple grain. It is high in Nitriloside content, but now its been replaced by wheat which has practically none at all. Sorghum cane has been replaced by sugar cane with the same result. Even our cattle are fed increasingly on quick growing low Nitriloside grasses so there’s less vitamin B17 residue in the meat we eat. In some places, livestock now are being fed a diet containing 15% paper to fatten them quicker for market.
And so we see that in the past 50 years, the foods that once provided the American people with ample amounts of natural vitamin B17 gradually have been pushed aside or have been replaced altogether by foods almost devoid of this factor. Significantly during this same time span that the cancer rate has moved steadily upward to the point where today, one out of every four persons in the United States is destined to contract this disease.
The Vitamin Theory Of Cancer:
The ultimate scientific test of the Vitamin theory of cancer would be to take a large number of people numbering in the thousands and over a period of many years expose them to a consistent diet of rich Nitriloside foods and then check the results. Fortunately, this has already been done.
In the remote recesses of the Himalaya mountains between Pakistan, India and China, there is a tiny kingdom called Hunza. These people are known the world over for their longevity and good health. It’s not uncommon for Hunzicuts to live beyond 100 years and some even to 120 or more. Visiting medical teams from the outside world report that there never has been a case of cancer in Hunza. Although presently accepted science is unable to explain why these people should be free of cancer, its interesting to note that the average Hunza diet contains over 200 times more Nitriloside than the average American diet. In fact, in that land where there is no such thing as money, a mans wealth is measured by the number of apricot trees he owns. And the most prized of all foods is considered the apricot seed. It’s also interesting to learn that when the Hunzicuts leave their secluded land and adopt the menus of other countries, they soon succumb to the same diseases and infirmities, including cancer, as the rest of mankind.
The Eskimo’s are another people that have been observed by medical teams for many decades, and found to be totally free of cancer. The traditional Eskimo diet is amazingly rich in Nitrilosides that come in the meat of caribou and other grazing animals, and also from the Salmon berry that grows abundantly in the arctic areas. When the Eskimo abandons his traditional way of life and begins to rely on westernized foods, he becomes even more cancer-prone than the average American.
There are many other peoples of the world that could be sited with these same characteristics. The
Abkhazians near the Black Sea, the Hopi and Navajo Indians of North America, certain native populations in South America and South Africa, from all races and all regions of the world. But one thing they have in common is the degree to which these people are free from cancer is in direct proportion to the amount of Nitrilosides or vitamin B17 found in their native diet.
In answer to this, the skeptic may argue that these primitive groups aren’t exposed to the same cancer producing elements that modern man is, and perhaps that’s why they are immune. Let them breathe the same smog-filled air, smoke the same cigarettes, swallow the same chemicals added to their food or drinking water, use the same soaps or deodorants, and then see how they fare.
This of course, is a valid point, but fortunately, that question has been resolved by experience. For over two decades, there has been a steadily growing group of people who have accepted the vitamin theory of cancer and have altered their diets accordingly. They represent all walks of life, all ages, both sexes, and reside in almost every advanced nation in the world. It’s estimated that there are many thousands in the United States alone. Now, it’s true that there is no way to determine their exact number, or to conduct clinical examinations on each of them, but they do constitute a well-defined group that is both vocal and conspicuous. It’s significant, therefore, that after starting and maintaining a diet rich in vitamin B17, none of these people has ever been known to contract cancer. Now let’s repeat that statement. While their fellow citizens are suffering from cancer at the rate of one out of every four, not one of these thousands has ever been known to contract this dread disease.
For many persons, the logic of all these facts put together is so great that it would be easy to close the case right here. But in view of the powerful opposition against this concept, let’s not content ourselves only with the logic of the theory. Let’s reinforce our convictions with the science of the theory also, that we may understand why it works the way our logic tells us that it must.
In 1902, John Beard, a professor of embryology at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, reported that there were no discernible differences between highly malignant cancer cells and certain pre-embryonic cells that were quite normal in the early stages of pregnancy. In technical terms, these normal cells are called Trophoblasts. Extensive research had led professor Beard to the conclusion that cancer and Trophoblasts are in fact, one in the same. His theory is therefore known as the “Trophoblastic Thesis of Cancer”.
The Trophoblast in pregnancy indeed does exhibit all the classical characteristics of cancer. It spreads and multiplies rapidly as it eats its way into the uterus wall preparing a place where the embryo can attach itself for maternal protection and nourishment. The Trophoblast is formed as a result of a chain reaction starting with another cell identified as the Diploid Totoponen. For our purposes, let’s call this the “Total Life Cell”, because it contains within it all the separate characteristics of the complete organism, and has the total capacity to evolve into any organ or tissue, or for that matter, into the complete embryo itself. About 80% of these total life cells are located in the ovaries or testes where they serve as a genetic reservoir for future offspring. The rest of them are distributed elsewhere in the body for a purpose not yet fully understood, but may involve the regenerative or healing process for damaged tissue.
The hormone estrogen is well known for its ability to affect changes in living tissue. Although it’s generally thought of as a female hormone, it’s found in both sexes and performs many vital functions. Wherever the body is damaged, either by physical trauma, chemical action or illness, estrogen always appears in great quantities, possibly serving as a stimulator or catalyst for body repair. It’s now known that the total life cell is triggered into Trophoblasts when it comes into contact with estrogen. When this happens to those total life cells that are evolved from the fertilized egg, the result is a placenta and umbilical cord, a means of nourishing the embryo. But when it occurs non sexually as part of the healing process, the result is cancer.
When cancer begins to form, the body reacts by attempting to seal it off and surrounding it with cells that are similar to those in the location where it occurs. A bump or lump is the usual result. Under microscopic examination, most of these tumors are found to resemble a mixture or hybrid of both Trophoblast and surrounding cells, a fact that has led many researchers to the premature conclusion that there are many different types of cancer. But the degree that the various tumors appear to be different is the same degree to which they are benign. Which means that it’s the degree to which there are non-cancerous cells within it. The greater the malignancy, the more these tumors begin to resemble each other, and the more clearly they begin to take on the classic characteristics of pregnancy Trophoblasts. And the most malignant of all cancers, the coyliomiomas, are almost indistinguishable from Trophoblast cells. For as Dr. Beard pointed out over 70 years ago, they’re one and the same.
Let’s turn now to the question of defense mechanisms. Before we can hope to conquer cancer, first we must understand how nature conquers cancer, how nature protects the body and controls the growth of Trophoblast cells.
All animals contain billions of white blood cells. One of the functions of these cells is to attack and destroy anything that is foreign or harmful to our bodies. For this reason, it would seem logical that they would attack cancer cells also. But since cancer is Trophoblast, and since Trophoblast is not foreign to the body, but is in fact a vital part of the life cycle, nature has provided it with a very effective means of avoiding the white cells. One of the characteristics of the Trophoblast is that it is surrounded by a thin protein coating that carries a negative electrostatic charge. The white cells also have a negative charge, and since similar polarities repel each other, the Trophoblast is well protected.
Part of the solution to this problem is found in the pancreas, which secretes an enzyme called Tripsin. When this enzyme reaches the Trophoblast in sufficient quantity, it digests the protective protein coat. The cancer then is exposed to the attack of the white cells, and it dies. Applying this to the embryo, we find that the Trophoblast cells there continue to grow and spread right up to the eighth week, and then, suddenly, with no apparent reason, they stop growing and are destroyed. Recent research has provided the explanation. It’s in the eighth week that the baby’s pancreas begins to function.
Now, it’s significant that the upper intestine is near the point where the pancreas empties into it. It is the one place in the human body where cancer is never found. We note also that diabetics, those who suffer from a pancreas malfunction are three times more likely to contract cancer than non-diabetics. These facts which have puzzled medical investigators for years at last can be explained with the Trophoblastic Thesis of Cancer.
But what happens if the pancreas is weak, or if the cancer growth is so high that the enzyme Tripsin can’t keep up with it. Then what? The answer is that nature has provided a backup mechanism, a second line of defense that can do the job even if the first line should fail. It involves a unique chemical compound that poisons the malignant cell while nourishing all the rest. And this is where the vitamin concept of cancer finally comes back into the picture. The chemical compound in question of course is vitamin B17, which is found in those natural foods containing Nitrilosides. It’s known also as Aligdalin, and as such has been used and studied extensively for well over 100 years. But in its concentrated and purified form developed by Dr. Krebs, specifically for cancer therapy, it is known as Laetrile. For the sake of clarity in this presentation, however, we shall favor the more simple name, Vitamin B17.
The B17 molecule contains 2 units of sugar, one of benzaldahyde, and one of cyanide all tightly locked together within it. Now as anyone knows, cyanide can be highly toxic and even fatal if taken in sufficient quantity. However, locked as it is in this natural state, it is completely inert chemically, and has absolutely no effect on living tissue. There is only one substance that can unlock this molecule and release the cyanide. That substance is an enzyme called beta-glucosadase which we call the unlocking enzyme. When B17 comes in contact with this enzyme, not only is the cyanide released, but also the benzaldahyde which is highly toxic by itself. In fact, these two, working together are at least 100 times more poisonous than either of them separately. The unlocking enzyme is not found to any dangerous degree anywhere in the body except at the cancer cell where it always is present in great quantity. The result is that vitamin B17 is unlocked at the cancer cell. It becomes poisonous to the cancer cell, and only to the cancer cell.
There’s another important enzyme called Wildanese which we will identify as the protecting enzyme. The reason is that it has the ability to neutralize cyanide by converting it instantly into by-products that actually are beneficial and essential for health. This enzyme is found in great quantities in every part of the body except the cancer cell, which consequently is not protected. Here then is a biochemical process that destroys cancer cells while at the same time nourishes and sustains non-cancer cells. It’s an intricate and perfect mechanism of nature that simply couldn’t have been accidental.
There is much speculation today about carcinogens, the things that supposedly cause cancer. We are told that researchers now have proven that smoking or excessive exposure to the sun or chemical additives to our food or even certain viruses all can cause cancer. But as we have seen, the real cause is an enzyme and vitamin deficiency. The other things are merely the specific triggers that start the process. Anything that produces prolonged stress or damage to the body can trigger off the production of estrogen as a part of the healing process. If this goes unchecked because the body lacks the necessary chemical ingredients to fight back, then the result is cancer. Specific carcinogens, therefore, do not “cause” cancer. They merely determine where it’s going to occur.
Of course, nature’s defenses against cancer include more than just the pancreatic enzymes and vitamin B17. Research has shown that an important role may also be played by other enzymes, other vitamins, oxygenation of the blood, PH levels, and even body temperature. Vitamin B17 seems to be the most vital and direct acting of all these factors, but none of them can be ignored for they’re an interlocking part of the total natural mechanism. Fortunately, it’s not necessary for man to understand fully every theoretical aspect of this mechanism in order to make it work for him in practice. All that he really needs to know is the necessity of eating foods rich in all the vitamins and minerals and of minimizing stress to the body.
The reality of the vitamin B17 concept of cancer has been proven in the laboratory beyond any doubt. For example, Dr. Dean Burk, head of the pseudo-chemistry section of the National Cancer Institute has reported that in a series of tests on animal tissue that B17 had no effect on normal cells, but released so much cyanide and benzaldahyde when it came in contact with cancer cells that not one of them could survive. He said, “When we add laetrile to a cancer culture under the microscope, we can see the cancer cells dying off like flies.”
Common Sense Is In Order:
We’ve said that vitamin B17 is harmless to non-cancer cells. This is true, but perhaps it would be more accurate to say that it’s as harmless as any substance can be. After all, even life essential water or oxygen can be fatal if taken in unnaturally large doses. And this is true also of vitamin B17. for example, there is one case of a man who reportedly died from devouring almost a cup of apple seeds. Incidentally, the case never has been authenticated, but assuming it’s true, if the man had eaten the apples also, he would have obtained enough rodenese from the whole fruit to offset the effect of even that many seeds in his stomach. But that would have required that he eat several cases of apples which of course would have been impossible in the first place.
Nature can do only so much. It cannot anticipate excess of this kind. Therefore, it’s wise to follow the simple rule that one should not eat at one time more seeds than he likely would consume if he were also eating a reasonable quantity of the whole fruit. This is a common sense rule with a large safety margin that can be followed with complete confidence.
Now, when it comes to the laboratory forms of B17 known as amygdaline or laetrile, there’s even less cause for concern. For over 100 years, standard pharmacology reference books have described this substance as non-toxic. After a century of use in all parts of the world, there never has been a reported case of related death or even serious illness. In one series of tests, white rats were fed 70 times the normal human dose of laetrile and the only side effects produced were greater appetite, weight gain, and superior health. Just what one would expect from taking a vitamin. Aspirin tablets are 20 times more toxic that the equivalent amount of laetrile. And in fact, Dr. Burk of the National Cancer Institute has demonstrated that laetrile is even less toxic than sugar.
The Negative Side:
Let’s turn now to the all-important question. Does laetrile, or Vitamin B17, actually control cancer in human beings, and if it does, is there statistical evidence to support that claim? Spokesmen for organized medicine say “No”. Almost all opposition to laetrile is based upon a 1953 report by the cancer commission of the California Medical Association. The report said flatly, “No satisfactory evidence has been produced that indicate any significant pseudo-toxic effect of laetrile on the cancer cell.” Using this report as a primary reference, government agencies declared that it was illegal to prescribe, transport or even recommend laetrile. The report was written by the committee chairman, Dr. Ean McDonald, and the committee’s secretary, Dr. Henry Garland. There were seven other prominent physicians appointed to the committee, but none of them, not even the men who wrote the report had any personal experience with laetrile. They had based their conclusions entirely on the written records of other experimenters.
The scientific judgment of these men perhaps can be best appreciated by noting that McDonald and Garland were the doctors who had made headlines claiming that there was no connection between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. In fact, McDonald had claimed that 24 cigarettes per day was a harmless pastime, and then, he said, “A pack a day keeps lung cancer away.” But even more important than this scientific ineptitude is the fact that both men actually had falsified their summary of the laetrile experiments. For example, their report claimed that microscopic examinations of tumors taken from patients treated with laetrile showed no evidence of beneficial chemical effect. Yet, ten years later it was learned that one of the pathologists conducting the examinations in fact did report several instances of tumor destruction which he stated at the time could well have been caused by the action of laetrile. McDonald and Garland had not told the truth.
The report also stated that laboratory technicians had tried unsuccessfully to release cyanide from laetrile. This was offered as powerful evidence that the entire theory was a fraud. And yet, just two months prior to that, the American Medical Association chemical lab reported that it had been successful in releasing cyanide from laetrile. And of course, other labs had done this also, including the California food and drug lab, and, of course, the pseudo-chemistry lab of the National Cancer Institute. Again, McDonald and Garland had obscured the truth.
Another important aspect of this report is that the patients had received extremely small doses of laetrile, much too small to prove anything. Today, it’s not uncommon to administer 2 or 3 grams of the material in a single injection. Generally, 30 or 40 grams are required before the patient can report tangible signs of improvement. But in the California experiment, the maximum total dosage was only about 2 grams, and even that was divided among 12 injections. Five patients had received only two injections and five had received only one. So it’s not surprising that these experiments had failed to obtain convincing evidence that laetrile will work. What is surprising, however, is that this and similar discredited reports continue to be cited by the American Cancer Society as proof that laetrile is a hoax.
The Positive Side:
But let’s return to the original side of this question. What evidence is there to support the claim that laetrile does work? As we have seen, the health records of the Hunzicuts, the Eskimo’s and many others around the world are statistically conclusive that vitamin B17 does control cancer in human beings with an effectiveness approaching 100%. There can be little controversy over that!
But what about cancer once it already has started? Can B17 restore a person to health after he has contracted the disease. The answer is, “Yes, if it is caught in time, and if the patient is not too badly damaged by prior X-ray treatment or toxic drugs.” Unfortunately, most cancer victims start taking laetrile only after their disease is so far advanced that they’ve been given up as hopeless by routine medical channels. Usually, they have been told that they have only a few more months or weeks to live. And it’s in this tragic state of near death that they turn to vitamin therapy as a last resort. If they die, and indeed, many of them do, then they are counted as statistical failures for laetrile. In reality, it’s a victory for laetrile that any of them should be saved at this stage. For once a deficiency disease has progressed so far, the damage it does simply can’t be reversed. A man who has been shot with a gun can have the bullet removed, but still die from the wound. Likewise, a patient can have his cancer destroyed by vitamin B17 and still die from the irreversible damage already done to his vital organs. And so, in view of this tremendous handicap, the number of terminal patients who have been restored to health is most impressive. In fact, there are literally thousands of such case histories in the medical record.
The American Cancer Society has tried to create the impression that the only ones who have been saved by laetrile are those who merely were hypochondriacs and who really never had cancer in the first place. But the record reveals quite a different story. Let’s take a look at just a few examples.
Mr. David Edmonds, of Pinole California was operated on in June of 1971 for cancer of the colon which also had metastasized or spread to the bladder. When the surgeon opened him up, he found that the malignant tissue was so wide spread that it was almost impossible to remove it all. The blockage in the intestine was relieved by severing the colon and bringing the open end to the outside of the abdomen, a procedure known as a colostomy. Five months later, the cancer had returned and Mr. Edmonds was told that he had only a few more months to live. Mrs. Edmonds, who was a nurse, had heard about laetrile and decided to give it a try. Six months later, instead of lying on his death bed, Mr. Edmonds surprised the doctors by feeling well enough to resume an almost normal routine. An exploratory cystoscopy of the bladder revealed that the cancer there had completely disappeared. At his own insistence, he was admitted to the hospital to see if his colon could be put back together again. In surgery, they found nothing even resembling cancer tissue. So they re-connected the colon and sent him home to recuperate. It was the first time in the history of the hospital that a reverse colostomy had been performed. Mr. Edmonds is now living a near normal life of health and vigor.
In 1967, Mrs. Joan Wilkinson had a tumor removed from her lower left leg just below the thigh. Four months later, there was a recurrence requiring additional surgery and the removal of muscle and bone. A year later, a lump in the groin appeared, and a biopsy revealed that her cancer had returned and was spreading. Her doctor told her that surgery would be necessary again, but this time, they would have to amputate the leg, the hip, the bladder, and one of the kidneys as well. The plan was to open up her lungs to see if the cancer had located there. If it had, then, they would not amputate because there wouldn’t be any chance of saving her anyway. At the urging of her sister and a mutual friend, Mrs. Wilkinson decided not to undergo surgery, but to try laetrile instead. Her doctor was upset by this. He told her that without the surgery, she couldn’t live any longer than twelve weeks. Five weeks after starting on laetrile, the lump in her groin had disappeared. Today, years later, she’s living a healthy and productive life.
In 1972, Dr. Dale Danner, a podiatrist from Santa Paula California, developed a pain in the right leg and a severe cough. X-rays revealed the carcinoma of both lungs and what appeared to be massive secondary tumors in the leg. The cancer was inoperable, and resistant to radio-therapy. The prognosis was “incurable and fatal”. At the insistence of his mother, Dr. Danner agreed to try laetrile although he had no faith in its effectiveness. Primarily, to please her, he obtained a large supply in Mexico. But he was convinced from what he had read in the medical journals that it was nothing but quackery and a fraud. Perhaps, it was even dangerous, he thought, for he noticed in the literature that it contained large amounts of cyanide. Within a few weeks, the pain and the coughing had progressed to the point where no amount of medication could hold it back. Forced to crawl on his hands and knees and unable to sleep for three days and nights, he became despondent and desperate. Groggy from the lack of sleep and from the drugs and from the pain, finally, he turned to his supply of laetrile. Giving himself one more mass of medication, hopefully to bring on sleep, he proceeded to administer the laetrile directly into an artery. Before losing consciousness from the medication, Dr. Danner had succeeded in taking at least an entire ten day supply and possibly as high as a 20 day supply all at once. When he awoke 36 hours later, much to his amazement, not only was he alive, but also the cough and pain were greatly reduced. His appetite had returned, and he was feeling better than he had in months. Reluctantly, he had to admit that laetrile was working, so he obtained an additional supply and began routine treatment with smaller doses. Three months later, he was back to work.
Since laetrile was developed in 1952, there have been literally thousands of similar case histories reported and documented. And when all these are viewed as a group, they begin to take on the form of numerical statistics, which of course are more meaningful than individual cases. There have been at least 26 medical papers written by well known physicians who have used laetrile experimentally in the treatment of their own patients, and have concluded that laetrile is both safe and effective in the treatment of cancer.
The American Cancer Society and other spokesmen for the medical establishment would have us believe that only crack-pots have endorsed this conclusion. But the doctors that have conducted these experiments and those who share their conclusions are not quacks. Here are just a few of the names:
In west Germany, there is Hans Nieper, MD. Director of the department of medicine at the Silversie Hospital in Hanover. He is a pioneer in the medical use of cobalt and is credited with the development of the anti cancer drug cyclophosphomide. Undoubtedly, he is one of the most famous and respected cancer specialists.
In Canada, there is Dr N. R. Bouziane, director of research laboratories at St. Jaundauk Hospital in Montreal. He is a member of the hospital’s tumor board in charge of chemo-therapy. Also, he is dean of the American Association of bio-analysts.
In the Philippines, there is Dr. Manuel Navarro, professor of medicine and surgery at the University of Santo Thomas in Manila. He is distinguished internationally as a cancer researcher, and has over 100 scientific papers to his credit, some of which have been read before the international cancer congress.
In Mexico, there is Dr. Ernesto Contreras, who for over a decade has operated the famous “Good Samaritan” cancer clinic in Tijuana. He’s one of Mexico’s most distinguished medical figures. He received post-graduate 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.
In Belgium, there is Dr. Naison of the University of Luivan.
In Italy, there is Dr. Guidetti of the University of Purin.
In Japan, there is Dr. Suiki, a prominent physician in Tokyo.
And in the United States there are such respected names as Dr. Burk of the National Cancer Institute, Dr. Morone of the Jersey City Medical Center, Dr, Kregs who developed laetrile, Dr. Richardson of San Francisco, and many more from over 20 countries with equally impeccable credentials.
Now, these researchers have reported that most of their patients have experienced several important side effects including an immediate lowering of blood pressure, improved appetite, an increase in the hemoglobin and red blood cell count, and above all, a release from pain without narcotics, even if the patient has started laetrile too late to be saved. The last effect is a merciful blessing in itself.
In the United States, if a doctor wishes to avoid being labeled a Quack, he must practice what is called “Consensus Medicine”. In other words, he must use only those treatments that generally are also used by his colleagues. At the present time in the field of cancer, those are limited to surgery, X-ray, and drugs. For comparison, therefore, let’s turn now to the results and benefits attained through these so-called “Orthodox” treatments.
Standard Orthodox Treatments:
As we shall see, surgery is the least harmful of the three, and in some cases, it can be a life-saving stop-gap measure. Surgery also has the psychological advantage of visibly removing the tumor. And from that point of view, it offers some comfort and hope. However, the degree to which surgery is useful is the same degree to which the tumor is not malignant. The greater the proportions of cancer cells in that tumor, the less likely that surgery will help. And the most highly malignant tumors of all generally are considered inoperable. The statistical rate of long term survival after surgery is at best only 10 or 15%. And once the cancer has metastasized to a secondary location, surgery has almost no survival value whatsoever. The reason of course is that like the other therapies approved by organized medicine, surgery removes only the tumor. It does not remove the cause!
The rationale behind X-ray therapy is essentially the same as with surgery. The medical objective is to remove the tumor, but to do so by burning it away, rather than by cutting it out. Here also, it’s primarily the non-cancer cell that’s destroyed. The more malignant the tumor, the more resistant it is to radio-therapy. In fact, this procedure has all the limitations and drawbacks of surgery, plus one more; it actually increases the likelihood that cancer will develop in other parts of the body. Yes, its a well established fact that excessive exposure to radioactivity is an effective way to induce cancer. This has been demonstrated by the survivors of Hiroshima, but a research team at the University of Buffalo recently reported that less than a dozen routine medical X-rays to the same part of the body increases the risk of leukemia by at least 60%. And these routine X-rays are nothing compared to the intense radiation used on cancer patients. X-rays induce cancer by at least two factors. First, they do physical damage to the body, which triggers off the production of Trophoblast cells as part of the healing process. Second, they weaken or destroy the white blood cells which as we have seen constitute the immunological defense mechanism, the bodies front line defense against cancer. As with all forms of currently popular treatments, once the cancer has metastasized to a second location, there is practically no chance that the radiology patient will live. So, in addition to an almost zero survival value, radio-therapy has the extra distinction of also spreading the very cancer it is supposed to combat.
The record of so-called anti-cancer drugs is even worse! Most of them currently in use are highly poisonous, not just to cancer, but to the rest of the body as well. In fact, generally, they are more deadly to healthy tissue than they are to the malignancy itself. Most of these drugs are described as radio-mimetic, which means that they mimic or produce the same effects as radiation. Consequently, they also suppress the immunological defense mechanism, and thus help to spread the cancer to other areas. But whereas X-rays are directed to only one or two locations, these chemicals do their deadly work on every cell in the entire body. The use of exotic and highly toxic drugs is the latest fad in cancer therapy. As scores of these drugs are developed each year, cancer patients become the human guinea pigs upon which they are tested. The tragic results are well depicted in the following statements taken from just a few of the official chemo-therapy reports of the National Cancer Institute.
An effort was made to choose patients who were well enough to withstand the anticipated toxicity. Early death of two of the first five patients treated caused a reduction to 8 milligrams per kilogram per day. No significant anti-tumor benefit of any duration was observed. In this study, 6 of the 8 children died. No therapeutic effect was observed. Toxic clinical manifestations consisted of vomiting, hypertension, changes in oral mucus membranes, and diarrhea. Renal damage and cerebral edema were observed at post-mortem examination in each of the six patients who died while receiving this drug. The death of two patients was unequivocally caused by drug toxicity. Eight of the 14 patients that survived the initial courses of therapy showed rapid and general deterioration and died within ten weeks after therapy began.
And so it goes, year in and year out. Deadly experiments wholly approved by organized medicine. Experiments that can only be viewed as a form of human vivisection. This then is a comparison between vitamin therapy and orthodox treatments.
The statistics that follow are taken from the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, and from the clinical records of those physicians who have used laetrile in the treatment of their own patients. They vary widely, depending on the age of the patient, the sex, the cancer location, and the degree of malignancy. Consequently, the figures shown will be averages for all kinds and all groups together. This is the story they tell.
Of those with advanced metastasized cancer who have been told by their physician that there is no hope, only 15% will be saved when they turn to vitamin therapy, which is not good. But under orthodox treatment, less than one out of 1000, or 0.1% will survive 5 years.
Of those with early diagnosed cancer, at least 80% will be saved by vitamin therapy. But no more than 15% will survive under orthodox treatment.
And of those who are presently healthy with no clinical cancer to begin with, close to 100% can expect to be free from cancer as long as they routinely obtain adequate amounts of B17. But those who subsist on the typical American diet and rely only on the therapies of organized medicine are doomed to a survival rate of just 84%. And that figure includes all ages. It is much less for those above 30.
As mentioned previously, these figures will vary widely depending on age, sex, cancer location, and degree of malignancy. Also, they are somewhat arbitrary when it comes to separating early diagnosed cancers from those that are advanced, for often, there is a gray area between the two. Nevertheless, in general, they are as accurate as any such tabulation can be. And they tell an impressive story that cannot be brushed aside!
Considering the results obtained by orthodox medicine, it’s been said that voodoo witchcraft would be just as effective, and perhaps even more so, for at least then, the patient would be spared the deadly side effects of radiation and chemical poisoning.
Just as we are amused today at the primitive medical practices of history, future generations will look back at our own era and cringe at the senseless cutting, burning, and poisoning that now passes for medical science. No matter how useless current practices may be, consensus medicine demands that they be used by every physician, regardless of how many patients are lost, the doctors professional standing is upheld because those who pass judgment through peer review are using the same treatments and getting the same tragic results. On the other hand, if a doctor deviates from this pattern and dares to apply nutrition as the basis of his treatment, even if he attains a high degree of success, he is condemned as a quack! He may lose his hospital privileges and even is subject to arrest.
There is no doubt that most of the opposition to vitamin therapy comes from well intentioned people who don’t yet have all the facts. But vested interests also play an important role. As stated at the beginning of this presentation, the science of cancer therapy isn’t nearly as complicated as the politics of cancer therapy. The history of how these vested interests have succeeded in influencing the medical profession, government agencies and public opinion is a fascinating story by itself. But of course, time doesn’t permit it to be told here.
For the full story of both the science and the politics, read “World Without Cancer”. This book presents all the information presented here, plus a great deal more. It includes extensive extracts from primary research documents, and is amply footnoted so that the serious student can pursue his own avenues of investigation. We recommend that you obtain several copies of this book for the purpose of lending to your friends. The information contained could well save their lives.
Once vitamin B17 is as widely understood and available as other vitamins, cancer will be as rare as scurvy and pellagra today. When Nitrilosides are used as a routine seasoning to our food as iodized table salt, then the battle finally will be won. This is our goal, and it is an objective that can be reached right now by anyone that will act upon this knowledge. You and your family now may become secure from cancer. But that’s only because someone else has helped to bring these facts to your attention. Can you do less for others?
Join with us in this noble task. Together, we can create a “World Without Cancer.”
For more information on the Web; http://www.worldnewsstand.net/health/cancer1.htm
To Order Vitamin B17 (USA Supplier): http://www.ApricotPower.com