Re: Food-based Laetrile -- Nutrient that Reduces Cancer Risk

On Jun 9, 12:02 pm, PeterB <p...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 9, 9:55 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Jun 9, 1:15 am, PeterB <p...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 8, 9:50 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 8, 12:34 am, PeterB <p...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 5, 3:33 am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

PeterB <p...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If you happen to swallow an apple seed you have ingested
amygdalin, or vitamin B17.

No, you haven't, because there is no such thing as "vitamin B17".

Translation:  Equating amygdalin (laetrile) to a vitamin threatens the
chemotherapy franchise that I defend on behalf of my sponsors, thus I
refute the association.

Well, tough sh*t.

Tought sh*t is an alternative treatment for thinking.

Calling Laetrile a vitamin is absurd. An absence of a vitamin in one's
diet causes a deficiency problem depending on the particular vitamin.

That was the point of Krebs conclusion that laetrile is a vitamin,
genius.  

Yeah, so what makes Krebs right? NOTHING.

As was stated, bonehead, the evidence is the observation of the rarity
of cancer in populations with pronouned consumption of nitriloside-
rich foods.  Populations with a declining consumption of such foods
experience a prevalence of cancer.

Please provide the well designed epidemiological stduies showing that
there is an actual link. Remember, correlation does not equate with
causation.

 Published studies have shown a
substantial relationship between diet and cancer [ref.http://www.ncbi.nlm..nih.gov/pubmed/12243933.]  Your desire to push
chemotherapy on behalf of your sponsors is touching, but
scientifically antiquated.

The cited study does not mention your posion. There is no connection.
typical of you.


An absence of laetrile in one's diet causes nothing, except avoidance
of possible cyanide poisoning.

Since many of your ancestors relied on foods rich in nitrilosides
without cyanide poisoning. and you are here, that comment is
fatuous.

Actually, your PONTIFICATION is fatuous. You make many claims, such as
this, to dismiss what you cannot prove otherwise. There are well
documented cases of cyanide poisoning due to using your "protocol"
and, you cannot prove otherwise.

And where are these "well documented cases" you claim justify your
hysteria about apricot seeds?

I have posted them several times. Look them up.

And, dumb***, I personally know of one person who died from cyanide
poisoning as the direct result of consuming pits, etc. My aunt in
1969.

Your constant distortion of fact and evidence over the years combined
with these "personal" stories leaves me unconvinced.

You would be unconvinced until your last breath. You are incapable of
changing your mind, simply because you lack one.

 You refer to
such accounts as "purely anecdotal" when the argument favors your own
promotion of a dangerous drug.  I know, straddling the fence of
hypocrisy is part of the script, but it sure looks uncomfortable.

There is no hypocrisy. In some cases, one anecdote can disprove a
point. YOU claimed no deaths, I disproved it.

Tough.


Promotors of laetrile are murderers.

Projection: You are referring to advocates of chemotherapy and its
inability to treat or cure the vast majority of cancers, but don't let
the facts get in your way.

No ***-for-brains, I am specifically referring to scumbags such as
yourself who promote this totally useless idea and lure people away
from proven treatments such as chemotherapy, radiation and surgery.

Treatments proven scientifically worthless in the vast majority of
cancers, despite your promotion of them on behalf of your sponsors.
Say hello to them for me

Actually those treatments are successful for many cancers. You just
continue to lie.


- Show quoted text -

.