These links were sent to me by another forum member. I see that he has not posted them, so I thought I'd start the discussion. A big fan of nitrilosides is bifrost99 so, hopefully, he'll chime in.

https://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/27/8/766

https://www.blackherbals.com/sorghum_...african_nu.htm

https://www.maycozapper.org/cancer.asp

These links indicate that an abstract exists but is not accessible at this source.

https://tinyurl.com/flx9f

https://tinyurl.com/zdqw3

The gist of nitrilosides is:

Nitrilosides is one of those theories of healing that FDA/Official Medicine has simply overlooked (I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt). When the public gets damn sick 'n tired of expensive and toxic treatments for cancer that don't even work, they may figure out a way to force Official Medicine to take another long hard look at nitrilosides.

One can only hope.

Thanks for the links.

Data apparently confirms what B-17 proponents have been saying all along. Here's a link I find really thorough:

https://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk

I started a thread about it here:

https://www.medscitalk.com/ftopic27067.html

Gerry

I listened to the story at the "World Without Cancer" link some months ago. I didn't find it particularly compelling, faux dramatic though it was. "Warning--you are about to enter the Reality Zone...." I mean, please.

There are at least two theories that have been relegated to alternative medicine that seem plausible, at least to me. Vitamin B-17 is one of them; Rife technology is the other. It seems to me there ought to be a way to shame the NIH into taking a second look at these theories.

Does anyone have any thought as to how this can be accomplished?

Here's the opposing POV re laetrile.

https://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery.../laetrile.html

Is/are nitrilosides a vitamin? If Official Medicine doesn't want to acknowledge Krebs' synthetic version of nitrilosides, fine. Why not study the natural sources of nitrilosides? It's no use to trot out the laetrile story yet again, but focusing on nitrilosides may be possible.

bifrost, Just how do you principally derive your B17? Do you buy the shelled apricot pits? I know you eat the apple seeds.

As shown in

https://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk...ventative.html

there are lots of sources, and we can cycle through them.

Me, being from a culture where rice is staple, I've been able to get unpolished rice regularly for the last couple of years. Mung bean sprouts is a regular fare, too. Cassava in various forms (dessert, flour, directly boiled) is another almost regular source. So are various forms of beans and nuts. Whenever I get to eat apples and grapes, I bite into the seed and swallow it along with the rest of the fruit. I really have varied sources. Just knowing about them is usually enough. :wink: That's why I also wonder about the "commercialization" of sources like apricot pits or some other hyped up source (not that those don't have B-17). We have a lot of choices.

Gerry

Have you heard about the Vibe machine? Seems to be along the lines of Rife, too.

I've seen this before. It's more legalese than medicine. Note, too, that if you read all that quackwatch has to say, you'll end up seeing that they're no different from mainstream medicine. Anything not mainstream is a quack to them.

The claim is that cancer is a deficiency disease and B-17 is the nutrient that prevents it. B-17 is not really for cure, though there are cases that have been cured by it. Besides, looking at the theory, cancer is everywhere and in everyone.

As for what really happened in researches about this, here's something compelling from Ralph Moss:

https://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/ralphmoss.html

Seems like Moss's issue with B-17 started his "crusade" and web site.

You got a point here. The way I see it (I could be wrong) laetrile is a commercial version made by Krebs, which is from a group of compounds known as amygdalin, which in turn is a nitriloside. There's also the group called cyanogenetic glycosides. I don't know if that's equivalent to nitriloside. And we really could use a lot of these foods. But "scientific research" would not like to deal with large groups of compounds at a time. They'd rather deal with "purified" forms. Me, I'd rather enjoy the food. 8)

There's also the technicality about the term, "vitamin." Last I looked, such a substance is an essential co-factor in a chemical reaction. In this sense, B-17 is not a vitamin because it's not a co-factor. It's a reactant itself.

Gerry

I don't accept ALL that quackwatch has to say but I see no good reason not to accept facts, regardless of who reports them. Someone's opinion of a theory should not affect the factual history surrounding the theory. Either the history of laetrile is factually set forth in the article by quackwatch or it is not. If laetrile's history is correctly characterized, then its history is dubious, at best. If laetrile's history has been incorrectly characterized, I'd like to know the truth. At this point, however, fat chance.

If Ralph Moss's version of what was going on at MSK can be believed, there was something about research into laetrile that was not exactly forthcoming. On that basis, I think nitrilosides, however they're derived--but not necessarily laetrile--warrants a second look. I don't care if they're called a vitamin or a compound or a celestial vapor.

All the people who believe in laetrile's ability to impact health should be willing to enroll in a clinical study to determine, once and for all, if there's anything to laetrile and health. Therein lies the rub, no? How can you design an air-tight clinical study on a compound (laetrile) about which no one is interested anymore?

Well, you can't, so we turn to nitrilosides, which has no cloudy history. But, from the looks of it, nitrilosides has scant research history--cloudy or clear. Either nitrilosides exist or they do not. A search of PubMed finds three articles--out of 15 million--about nitrilosides.

1: Browne G Jr, Mortimer JD.
Remission of canine squamous cell carcinoma after nitriloside therapy.
Vet Med Small Anim Clin. 1976 Nov;71(11):1561-2. No abstract available.
PMID: 1049479 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

2: Houston RG.
Letter: Dietary nitriloside and sickle cell anemia in Africa.
Am J Clin Nutr. 1974 Aug;27( 8 ):766-9. No abstract available.
PMID: 4846403 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

3: Browne G Jr.
Remission of canine thyroid carcinoma following nitriloside therapy.
Vet Med Small Anim Clin. 1974 Feb;69(2):189. No abstract available.
PMID: 4492816 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

The thing to do would be find these articles and read what they have to say. Can anyone suggest how these abstracts can be obtained?