-9
World without Cancer -
G. Edward
Griffin:
Movie and Audio
Transcript.
Part 2
Common Sense and Toxicity Level:
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's 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 extra rhodanese 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 only do 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 also were
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.
And when it comes to the laboratory forms of vitamin B17
known as amygdalin
or Laetrile, there's even less cause for concern. For over a hundred
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 single reported case of related death or even serious
illness.
In one series of tests white rats were fed seventy 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 twenty times more toxic, than
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.
B17 - Does It Really Control Cancer:
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 official 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 to indicate
any
significant cytotoxic effect of Laetrile on the cancer cell."
IDIOTS and LIARS!
Using this report as a primary reference, government agencies soon
declared that it was illegal to prescribe, transport or even recommend
Laetrile. The report was written by the committee chairman, Dr. Ian
MacDonald 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 MacDonald and Garland were the doctors, who had made
headlines
claiming that there was no connection between cigarette smoking and
lung
cancer. In fact, MacDonald had claimed that twenty-four 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 had reported that it had been successful in releasing
cyanide
from Laetrile. And of course, other labs have done this also, including
the California Food and Drug Lab and of course, the cytochemistry lab
of
the National Cancer Institute. Again, MacDonald 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. 5 patients had received only 2
injections
and 5 had received only 1.
So it's not surprising that these experiments had failed to
obtain convincing
evidence that Laetrile worked. 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.
Can B17 Restore Health Once Cancer
Has Begun?
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 Hunzakuts, the Eskimos and many other groups
around the world are statistically conclusive that vitamin B17 does
control
cancer in human beings with an effectiveness approaching one-hundred
percent.
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's caught
in time and
if the patient isn't 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've 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 did 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
literally
are thousands of such case histories in the medical record. The
American
Cancer Society has tried to create the impression that the only ones,
who
claim to have been saved by Laetrile, are those, who merely were
hypochondriacs
and never really 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 Edmunds 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 widespread, it was almost
impossible
to remove it all. The blockage of the intestines was relieved by
severing
the colon and bringing the open end to the outside of his abdomen - a
procedure
known as a colostomy. Five months later the cancer had returned and Mr.
Edmunds was told that he had only a few more months to live.
Mrs. Edmunds, who is a nurse, had heard about Laetrile and
decided to
give it a try. Six months later instead of lying on his deathbed, Mr.
Edmunds
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 re-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. Edmunds now is living a near normal life of health and
vigor.
In 1967 Mrs. Joanne 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 the
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 and probably the
bladder
and one of the kidneys, as well. The plan was to open up her lungs
first,
to see, if 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 if she didn't have the surgery, she couldn't
possibly live longer, than twelve weeks. Five weeks after starting on
Laetrile,
the lump in her groin had disappeared. Today, years later, she is
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 a carcinoma of both lungs and what appeared to
be
massive secondary tumors in the leg. The cancer was inoperable and
resistant
to radiotherapy. 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 just to please her, he
obtained a large supply in Mexico. But he was convinced from what he
had
read in medical journals that it was nothing, but quackery and a fraud.
"Perhaps it was even dangerous", he thought, for he noticed from 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, from the drugs
and from the pain, finally he turned to his supply of Laetrile.
Giving himself one more massive dose of medication,
hopefully to bring
on sleep, he then 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 twenty-day supply - all at once.
When he awoke thirty-six hours later, much to his amazement
not only
was he still 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.
Doctors Who Have Used Laetrile:
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 published medical papers written by well-known
physicians,
who have used Laetrile experimentally in the treatment of their own
patients
and who 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 crackpots
have
endorsed this conclusion. But the doctors, who 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 Dr. Hans
Nieper,
director of the Department of Medicine at the Silbersee Hospital in
Hanover.
He is a pioneer in the medical use of cobalt and is credited with
developing
the anti-cancer drug cyclophosphamide. Undoubtedly, he is one of
the
world's most famous and respected cancer specialists.
In Canada there is Dr. N.R.
Bouziane,
director of Research Laboratories at St. Jeanne d'Arc Hospital in
Montreal.
He is a member of the hospital's tumor board in charge of chemotherapy.
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 Tomas in
Manila.
He is distinguished internationally as a cancer researcher and has over
one-hundred major 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 is 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. Maisin
of
the University of Louvain. In Italy there is Dr. Guidetti of the
University
of Turin. In Japan there is Dr. Sakai, a prominent physician in Tokyo.
And in the United States there are such respected names as Dr.
Burk of the National Cancer Institute, Dr.
Morrone of the Jersey City Medical Center, Dr.
Krebs, who developed Laetrile, Dr.
Richardson of San Francisco and many more from over twenty
countries
with equally impeccable credentials.
Brilliant Side Effects:
These researchers have reported that most of their patients 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 therapy too late to be saved, this
last
effect is a merciful blessing in itself.
Orthodox Treatments:
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!
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 the patient and his family 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 proportion of cancer cells in
that
tumor, the less likely it is 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 percent. 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 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 radiotherapy. In fact, this procedure has all the
same
limitations and drawbacks of surgery plus one more: it actually
increases
the likelihood that cancer will develop in other parts of the body.
X-Rays:
Yes, it's a well-established fact that excessive exposure to
radioactivity
is an effective way to induce cancer. This had been demonstrated not
only
among 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 sixty percent and these routine x-rays are nothing
compared
to the intense radiation used on cancer patients.
X-rays induce cancer because of 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
production of white blood cells, which, as we have seen, constitute the
immunological defense mechanism, the body's frontline 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 radiotherapy has the extra distinction of also spreading the very
cancer it's supposed to combat.
Anti-Cancer Drugs:
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're more deadly to
healthy
tissue, than they are to the malignant cell.
Most of these drugs are described as radiomimetic, which
means, 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 usually are directed to 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're tested. The tragic results
are
well depicted in the following statements taken from just a few of the
official Chemotherapy 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 eight milligrams per kilogram per day. No
significant anti-tumor benefit of any duration was observed... In this
study six of the eight children died... No therapeutic effect was
observed.
Toxic clinical manifestations consisted of vomiting, hypertension,
changes
in oral mucous 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 fourteen patients, who survived
their 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
fully approved
by organized medicine. Experiments that can be viewed only as a form of
human vivisection.
Vitamin Therapy For Cancer:
This then is the 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 one thousand - or one-tenth of
one percent - will survive five 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 presently are
healthy with
no clinical cancer to begin with, close to one hundred
percent
can expect to be free from cancer as long as they routinely obtain
adequate
amounts of vitamin 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're
somewhat
arbitrary, when it comes to separating early diagnosed cancers from
those
that're advanced, for often there's 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 lack of 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
surely 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 or even harmful current practices may
be, consensus
medicine demands that they be used by every physician. Regardless of
how
many patients are lost, the doctor's 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's no doubt that most of the opposition to vitamin
therapy comes
from well-intentioned people, who simply don't yet have all the facts.
But vested interest also plays 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 contains all the information
presented
in this film plus a great deal more. It includes extensive extracts
from
primary research documents and is amply footnoted, so that the serious
students 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
then will be as rare as is scurvy or pellagra today. When
nitrilosides
are used perhaps as a routine seasoning to our food like iodized table
salt, then the battle finally will be won. This is our goal and it's an
objective that can be reached right now by anyone, who will act upon
this
knowledge. You and 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!
NOTE:
1) It is illegal to sell Apricot kernels, even in
health stores
but you can order them thru various sites on the internet. Type
'Apricot
Seeds' in Google.
2) B17 is less effective if the patient does
not have a
properly functioning immune system.
3) People already devastated by chemo may be too late
for B17
to be effective.
4) Detoxification of the cells is critical. Far
Infrared is excellent for serious detoxification including
heavy
metal poisoning and chemicals.
5) Other factors that MUST be addressed in the
prevention and
killing of cancer cells - Oxygenation
of the cells and pH
balance
"Whilst eating foods and vitamins such as B17 may help
protect the body
from disease (and even reverse many conditions), in order to be truly
effective,
vitamins and minerals need other substances to react with in the body.
Probably the most important group are SYSTEMIC ENZYMES, these are the
ones
that do more than help with food digestion, they work all the way
through
the body in every organ. Enzymes are known as bio catalysts which means
they help other things to do their job quicker. There are about 3000
enzymes
in our system which causes over 7000 (enzymic) reactions to take
place."
- www.cart.apricotshop.co.uk
Watch the video 'WORLD WITHOUT CANCER' on UTube -
six parts.
Audio: www.worldwithoutcancer.com/flashmovies/cancer.ram
BEST site for research:
www.laetrile.com.au/copy.asp?sect=q1&page=mystory
Part
One
Possibly one of the biggest cover-ups known to
modern man regarding the treatment of cancer.
SOQI
NEWS
INDEX
All Editions.
SITE
MAP
