Cancer

[Dr. D]

Although I have no evidence, I have a theory about 'benign' particles in our system. Phil you mention excess anything is harmful and I believe that anything that our body ingests and can't use is harmful.

Clearly our body can't use silica. It can't be broken down. Even when ingested the only 'real' danger occurs from a possible laceration. If the particles were finely ground and rounded smooth then they would pass naturally.

However I would like to argue that it doeant merely pass as if it was never ingested. The energy out body consumes trying to digest it, check it for disease/virus, using enzymes and acid to try to break it down all take their toll. Cumulatively, the body is worse off. Only that which is beneficial leaves the body better off after its departure.

so in essence, since we all have some cancerous (mutated) cells, some apricot kernels would theoretically be excellent maintenance and any excess, regardless of how benign amygdalin may be without a cancerous enzyme, it still taxes the system. Taxes it like uncle Sam.

[PaleoPhil]

DaBoss88 and Dr. D, do you eat any raw nuts and if so do you soak them before you eat them?

DaBoss88, you note that you eat 9-12 raw apricot seeds daily. What do you think is roughly the max safe limit?

[raw-al]

so in essence, since we all have some cancerous (mutated) cells, some apricot kernels would theoretically be excellent maintenance and any excess, regardless of how benign amygdalin may be without a cancerous enzyme, it still taxes the system. Taxes it like uncle Sam.

Dr D,
You are assuming of course that cancer is mutated cells. That is the theory that the pharmaceutical companies like to espouse, essentially because they don't know any better and or don't want to as it allows them to sell their garbage cures.

In contrast Dr. Royal Rife a medical researcher and developer of devices that were (and still are) successful in treating cancer, has provided definitive proof that cancer is a virus, a smaller virus that can be seen with a regular microscope.

The problem is that to see them requires a very high power microscope that unfortunately produces so much heat that it kills the virus and so their movement and thus appearance of being alive is not evident.

However Dr. Rife was an interesting fellow. In his twenties he worked for a maker of lenses I believe Zeiss in Germany or Switzerland in the early 1920s and gained expertise in the process. Then at some point he designed and built a dark field microscope, which was able to observe things much smaller, without producing so much heat as to kill them. This scope used quartz crystal as part of the optics and I believe certain dyes to make the virus visible. It was called a darkfield microscope, because intense light was not needed.

This device was substantially more powerful and thus could see what is called unfilterable (smaller than 10microns) virus or virus too small to be captured by the filtration media.

This is explained in the various books on the subject such as Barry Lynes "The Cancer Cure That Worked"
http://www.cancer-cure-that-worked.com/
In this link watch the video especially after 3:35 There are other vids (produced back in the 1920s by Dr. Rife) that video the cancer virus (BX ?) while alive and during treatment and as they became morbid.

The Cancer Cure That Worked!

[raw-al]

Another more in depth vid made in 2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rvU9JrWycFI#!

[Dr. D]

Dr D,
You are assuming of course that cancer is mutated cells. That is the theory that the pharmaceutical companies like to espouse, essentially because they don't know any better and or don't want to as it allows them to sell their garbage cures.

You are correct in my previous assumption. So in light of new information, I will make an amendment but I believe the overall principle stands: Anything that is not benefiting our body is harming it, there is no "benign" middle ground. Concerning cancer (to remain on topic), our body therefore needs our immune system to fight the cancer, and ingesting "benign" substances would weaken the immune system due to energy wasted, etc. whereas the opposite, providing nutrition can only benefit our system to run optimally.

Thanks for those vids Al, the second one was a little long but if I have a spare 45 min I'll definitely check it out. haha

[LePatron7]

DaBoss88 and Dr. D, do you eat any raw nuts and if so do you soak them before you eat them?

DaBoss88, you note that you eat 9-12 raw apricot seeds daily. What do you think is roughly the max safe limit?

No to the nuts. I used to eat nuts and some times I'd soak them, not always though. I noticed at one point I started craving them like a SAD food and decided to stop ordering them.

I'm sure the safe limit is pretty high up there. I've heard of people with cancer eating a lot of apricot seeds (like 30+), while people without cancer are recommended to consume 7-15 for prevention.

[PaleoPhil]

Do you think that soaking nuts makes sense, and if so, why?

30 apricot kernels doesn't seem like much. Even 35 raw apricot kernels, which other sources report is the recommended maximum, contain just 109 calories, a mere snack. Does 35 kernels sound like a reasonable max to you?

[LePatron7]

Do you think that soaking nuts makes sense, and if so, why?

30 apricot kernels doesn't seem like much. Even 35 raw apricot kernels, which other sources report is the recommended maximum, contain just 109 calories, a mere snack. Does 35 kernels sound like a reasonable max to you?

Based on what I've read soaking makes sense. In nature they'd be rained on as they grew and naturally be "soaked."

It's not a lot of calories. But something to consider is that these foods aren't meant to be staples. It's not like beef fat, organs, etc which we expect to get a good amount of calories from.

What makes sense to me is that in a natural environment we'd eat the seeds of the fruit we eat. So realistically I don't think we'd eat 35+ apricot seeds in a day because it's unlikely we'd eat that many apricots.

Something else that I think is valid, is pre-fire when our ancestors were eating uncooked foods and everything was relatively toxin free and nutrient dense they probably didn't need to eat much Vitamin B17 to protect themselves. So I imagine the cleaner the diet, the lower the toxin intake, etc. the less Vitamin B17 you'd need. Which is why I only eat 9 daily. When I was on cooked SCD I ate more typically, 15-20. But I've taken into account my diet is much cleaner, my toxin load is lower, etc. so I've decreased my consumption.

For someone with cancer, they need those very large amount of Vitamin B17 since they're trying to cure cancer. Not just that, but they're likely going to continue eating low nutrient, high toxin foods (not raw paleo).

I've seen some places more than 35 recommended for cancer treatment, spread out through the day. For further info, I suggest starting at the "World Without Cancer" documentary on youtube. Another good source is the actual book, "World Without Cancer." I read the book and it was a very good read. It covered the politics of cancer as well as the medical side of it, how Vitamin B17 has been suppressed, the science of how it works, etc. Highly Recommended.

If you decide to try to get to those very high amounts of Vitamin B17, start slow. Increase gradually paying attention to any side effects. We eat very clean diets so my assumption is we don't need as much as someone with cancer, or a SAD eater.

[PaleoPhil]

@DaBoss88

What if any change does soaking do that's beneficial for people who eat soaked nuts? Rain occurs in nature, yes, but fruit seeds and nuts are shielded from rain by shells and fruit flesh.

Given that apricot seeds don't provide much calories and that in a natural environment, particularly pre-Neolithic, it's unlikely that many people would eat 35 or even 9 apricot seeds a day and that they are used more as a cancer therapy and preventative than as a significant food source like beef, fat and organs, doesn't that suggest that they are more of a medicinal than a staple-type food? Doesn't this suggest that their therapeutic mechanism would be more likely a medicinal one than a nutritive one, especially when things more commonly eaten as foods, such as almonds, macadamia nuts, pecans, walnuts and flax seeds, also contain amygdalin?

If you decide to try to get to those very high amounts of Vitamin B17, start slow. Increase gradually paying attention to any side effects.

Your warning and the practices recommended by sites promoting amygdalin or laetrile therapy speak louder than the nutrient theory (with apricot seeds as a "nutritional supplement" resolving an alleged "B17" deficiency) that some of those sites use (such as here: http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/FINALGUIDEUKpdfEbook.pdf) to try to explain the amygdalin and laetrile therapies. Suggestions that people start out with small doses of apricot kernels, often spread throughout the day, and not exceed a low to moderate dose (such as only 30-35 apricot kernels per day) fit the idea of the U- or J-shaped or inverted-U shaped dose-response curves of hormesis, rather than a nontoxic or near-nontoxic food.


Hormesis dose-response inverted-U curve

For example, this is from the site you linked to:

"To start, it is recommended that along with the purified forms of B-17, either intravenous or oral, cancer patients eat one apricot seed for every 10 lbs of body weight. If this dosage is tolerated well, it may be increased to 30 to 35 kernels per day. IMPORTANT: For adults, more than 6 per hour or 30 per day is not recommended." http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/faq.html

And there is this from a seller of raw apricot seeds:

"the consumption of apricot seeds, from any source, has the potential to cause adverse reactions when consumed in excess. This was the case with one person in Queensland who allegedly became unwell after consuming approximately 40 seeds in one sitting." http://www.chitree.com/apricot-seeds-in-the-news.html

---

@Dr. D:

so in essence, since we all have some cancerous (mutated) cells, some apricot kernels would theoretically be excellent maintenance and any excess, regardless of how benign amygdalin may be without a cancerous enzyme, it still taxes the system.

That fits nicely with hormesis. If it turns out that apricot seeds can be beneficial in hormetic doses, that leaves questions about how much, how often, and whether apricot kernels are the best or only source of hormetic benefit.

The more I read on this and related topics, the more it looks like the main potential benefit of apricot seeds and amygdalin in general would be hormetic. The bitter-tasting amygdalin in some fruit seeds, nuts and legumes appears to be one of several bitter plant compounds that have shown medicinal effects and fit the hormetic model:

"The TAS2R16 gene is one of the most studied genes in the bitter taste receptor family and interestingly it has been shown that it underwent recent selective pressure. It mediates the detection of salicin and other naturally occurring bitter compounds such as diphenidol, sodium benzoate, amygdalin, arbutin, helicin, D-salicin, sinigrin, and phenyl beta-D-glucopyranoside [76], [77]. Several of these compounds have been reported to have a pharmacologic effect and to be present in human food. For example, arbutin is present in pears, bearberries and wheat, and has been reported to be a strong inhibitor of bladder cancer proliferation [78]. Amygdalin, also known as Vitamin B17, is found in several fruit seeds and has been reported to have both apoptotic activity and to inhibit cell cycle genes [79] although its real effect on cancer remains controversial [80]. Sinigrin is found in plants of the Brassicaceae family such as broccoli, brussels sprouts, and the seeds of black mustard. It has been proposed to have a preventive effect on colorectal cancer and to inhibit bladder cancer [81]. The bark and leaf of willow species contain the prodrug salicin; following absorption salicin is metabolized into various salicylate derivatives [82]. Salicin has effects similar to aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) on analgesia and as an anti-inflammatory agent [82]. These reports point to a role for the TAS2R16 receptor in recognizing beneficial molecules with which the organism interacts during life. One can speculate that an impaired function of the receptor might affect the efficacy of the various compounds and that this could lead on the long term to a disadvantage for the organism." (Bitter Taste Receptor Polymorphisms and Human Aging, 2012, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3487725)

If amygdalin is the primary active ingredient in apricot seeds and is indeed beneficial in the right dose, then presumably other foods that contain amygdalin (such as some raw nuts) might provide similar benefits at similar doses (with individual variations).

[Dr. D]

Phil: I forgot to answer your question about nuts. No, I have stopped consuming nuts. I did consume them the first few days raw, but decided it was less of a food source and more of a "psychological snack" as well as questioning the quality of the nuts I own.

Also, the other negative side effects of Amygdalin I've heard were concerning blood not being able to carry oxygen as well, and would prevent the brain from getting everything it needs. No source, sorry, but I believe that was from my doctor when I asked him YEARS ago. (wow, it's been a while since I've been to a doc...)

There was a case report of severe cyanide poisoning after ingestion of laetrile. The 68 year old woman was admitted to emergency with seizures after having taken a dose of amygdalin (3 grams) while taking 4.8 grams of vitamin C. Vitamin C is believed to increase the conversion of amygdalin to cyanide in the body. It is also believed to reduce the amount of cysteine, which is used to detoxify cyanide. http://altmedicine.about.com/od/herbsupplementguide/a/laetrile.htm

I find that interesting because I remember reading in "Why we get fat and what to do about it" By Gary Taubes, that all vitamins and minerals necessary can be found in animals, except for vitamin C. Putting these two pieces of info together (very minimal but at least another piece) does a few things:

1- apricot kernels for fighting cancer do not work well in conjunction with Vit. C, promoting the idea that raw animals foods low in Vit. C should be a main source of food for people with cancer, or just in general.

2- Vit C as the panacea for immune support by western allopathic standards could just be flat out wrong. Vit. C may help an already compromised immune system by providing a short term boost (man cant kill an animal but finds some high Vit. C berries, enough to get him along for the night and not get sick overnight) and really Vit. C is not necessary for actual immune system health, provided the rest of necessary nutrition is available.

3- Cancer as something that occurs from a compromised immune system, being helped by hormetic treatment, also takes out the possibility that vit C is necessary or in some cases even beneficial, and makes it harmful to strengthening one's immunity, if #2 is correct, and one is consuming apricot seeds.

Of course most of this is unnecessary if one is consuming raw foods, in correct proportions.

[Alive]

@Dr D: Raw kidney contains significant vitamin C:

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/lamb-veal-and-game-products/4664/2

[Dr. D]

@Dr D: Raw kidney contains significant vitamin C:

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/lamb-veal-and-game-products/4664/2

12.4 mg / 4 oz of kidney is not significant when our "daily recommendation" is 500 mg/day. Often people consider dosing anywhere from 2000-4000 mg for when they start to feel sick in hopes of boosting their immune system to shorten the cold. I'd rather not try to eat 10 lbs. of kidney in a day if I start to feel sick to try and get 500 mg of vitamin C, haha.

Although this does change what Taubes talks about concerning getting vitamin C in animal foods, it doesn't change the principal of not getting full doses of vit. c from animal foods.

[PaleoPhil]

If you believe that then you might want to ask Lex Rooker how he manages to avoid scurvy, since he has been eating meat/fat/organs for years with only a smattering of plant foods here and there. I've seen multiple ZCers and LCers report that the need for vitamin C drops when one is eating mostly meat (fresh, rather than canned or salted, and it also appears to be easier to get scurvy on pemmican than fresh meats), because carbs increase the need for vitamin C. It's still an area of some mystery, though, as the cause of scurvy is still a matter of debate in scientific circles.

Of course, that doesn't guarantee that ZC/VLC provides optimal levels of vitamin C, but it does call into question the notion that 500 mg/day is the required or optimal intake for all adults, regardless of what sort of diet they're eating.


If amygdalin can provide a hormetic benefit, then amygdalin-containing nuts may provide more than just a "psychological snack" benefit. I've been eating more raw nuts lately since I noticed some benefit from raw Brazil nuts and found them to be extremely tasty (whereas I've never been particularly fond of cooked Brazil nuts), though it's still rather early to tell whether they'll remain as a regular (albeit limited due to the very high selenium and phytate content) food for me.

[Dr. D]

Phil, do you eat them raw? or do you sprout/soak them shortly?

I had brazil nuts for a time solely because of the selenium. Apparently the selenium fuels testosterone, something I figured I was low on. Though that doesn't seem to be an issue with a carnivore! Victory, right?

[LePatron7]

Given that apricot seeds don't provide much calories and that in a natural environment, particularly pre-Neolithic, it's unlikely that many people would eat 35 or even 9 apricot seeds a day and that they are used more as a cancer therapy and preventative than as a significant food source like beef, fat and organs, doesn't that suggest that they are more of a medicinal than a staple-type food? Doesn't this suggest that their therapeutic mechanism would be more likely a medicinal one than a nutritive one, especially when things more commonly eaten as foods, such as almonds, macadamia nuts, pecans, walnuts and flax seeds, also contain amygdalin?

I wasn't really suggesting that they ate 9 apricot seeds a day. But that in their diets, which would've contained all those things, they'd have likely gotten a decent amount of Vitamin B17. Especially since wild foods (like how that link shows wild blueberries have more) have more Vitamin B17.

[PaleoPhil]

Which link is it? Do you mean the wild blackberries at this link http://www.vitaminb17.org/foods.htm ? I've seen other sources list much lower amygdalin values for berries than for apricot seeds.

So do you eat apricot seeds because you don't think you can get enough amygdalin from other foods without them?

If we use the Paleolithic natural environment template as a clue (not necessarily a final answer, of course), wouldn't we eat the amygdalin foods seasonally and intermittently rather than daily, depending on individual tolerances, genetics, needs, etc.? And I've seen plausible points made for consuming both nutritive supplements and hormetic plant medicinals intermittently, rather than chronically. The idea of intermittent/hormetic intake is to challenge the body to robustify and encourage it to generate more of its own beneficial biochemicals and also avoid accumulated overload, rather than rely entirely on the crutch of daily supplements or medicinals. Another way of doing this is to mix up the supplements/medicinals, so one could take some every day if one wished, but vary them.

Something else occurred to me about this:

I think that it depends on what enzymes are present that determines whether the benzaldehyde and  hydrogen cyanide act as toxins or nutrients. The cancer site has enzymes that release the cyanide and benzaldehyde to destroy the cancer. While the rest of the body turns it into a useful substance.

Isn't one of the functions of enzymes to detoxify? If so, that still fits with amygdalin being a medicinal plant toxin/phytochemical, which would mean that QW is right about amygdalin being a (plant) toxin (but that doesn't necessarily mean they're right to portray it as a useless poison).

Toxin doesn't necessarily mean bad, as toxins can be beneficial medicinals, such as when trying to kill cancer cells. "The dose is the poison", rather than the toxin itself on its own. Sites like QW accept this for approved medicinal toxins like chemotherapy but contradictorily don't accept it for complementary medicinal toxins (which often have less negative long-term side effects). Unfortunately, with medicinal foods it's difficult to know what dose to use and with what frequency, as foods do not get studied much as therapeutic medicinals and their medicinal content tends to vary widely (varying doses may actually be hormetically beneficial, and this may partly explain why wild diets have been observed to be quite healthy).

[LePatron7]

Which link is it? Do you mean the wild blackberries at this link http://www.vitaminb17.org/foods.htm ? I've seen other sources list much lower amygdalin values for berries than for apricot seeds.

So do you eat apricot seeds because you don't think you can get enough amygdalin from other foods without them?

Yes, that link. Also from the youtube video it showed that laetrille rich grasses used to be the main food source for grazing animals (beef, lamb, etc.) but that it was replaced with low B17 foods. I imagine our ancestor's foods would have had much more B17 since they were all wild, from nutrient rich soil, etc. and all the animals were eating more nutrient dense food so had more in their tissues. So yes I eat the apricot seeds to mimic the amount they would have gotten, but also because I think it's the right amount to prevent cancer when used in conjunction with the other things I'm doing.

I can't say as to whether it's a hormetic benefit or not. My personal opinion is that illness happens on the trigger of nutrient deficiences, toxin overloads, etc.

Ie when the body is deficient in Vitamin B17 and overloaded with stressors (toxins, etc.) cancer develops. And that other illnesses behave similarly. So to prevent any problems I eat apricot seeds.

If we use the Paleolithic natural environment template as a clue (not necessarily a final answer, of course), wouldn't we eat the amygdalin foods seasonally and intermittently rather than daily, depending on individual tolerances, genetics, needs, etc.?

Sure, you could do that. Honestly I think the average raw paleo dieter is going to live cancer free due to limiting toxins, eating nutrient dense foods, etc. But for me I rather just eat the seeds.

[raw-al]

Although I have no evidence, I have a theory about 'benign' particles in our system. Phil you mention excess anything is harmful and I believe that anything that our body ingests and can't use is harmful.

Clearly our body can't use silica. It can't be broken down. Even when ingested the only 'real' danger occurs from a possible laceration. If the particles were finely ground and rounded smooth then they would pass naturally.

However I would like to argue that it doeant merely pass as if it was never ingested. The energy out body consumes trying to digest it, check it for disease/virus, using enzymes and acid to try to break it down all take their toll. Cumulatively, the body is worse off. Only that which is beneficial leaves the body better off after its departure.

so in essence, since we all have some cancerous (mutated) cells, some apricot kernels would theoretically be excellent maintenance and any excess, regardless of how benign amygdalin may be without a cancerous enzyme, it still taxes the system. Taxes it like uncle Sam.

Dr D.,

I am along time student of a medical system called Ayurveda.

Ayurveda says that when you eat food there are certain rules on how to consume it. These rules are simple and yet complicated to follow and it would be difficult to get them all right, all the time.

So Ay. presents an alternative: periodic cleansings which they call Pancha Karma. These cleansings clean out the body of things that have accumulated in various places in the body, somewhat as you have alluded to in your mention of silica.

Ay. classifies these foreign debris as Ama or undigested food. Basically Ay says we have 72 digestive fires (Nowadays we call them chemical reactions) If something causes these digestive fires to dim or go out, then the food that would normally be digested (chemically reacted) remains either undigested or partially digested or over-digested. This ama can be observed in yourself or anyone by looking at various places in the body for signs, the easiest being a tongue diagnosis using colour, texture, smell position, movement, shape, etc...

http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://ayurvedaposters.com/online/templatemedia/all_lang/resources/Tongue_diagnosis_18x24.jpg&imgrefurl=http://ayurvedaposters.com/shop/page/3?shop_param%3D&h=480&w=360&sz=177&tbnid=O9IwIDHhp2ycfM:&tbnh=96&tbnw=72&zoom=1&usg=__oqzZ9wnOyEXZUtNSroIs5LUR4Ro=&docid=H4gCIVPvHY5SyM&sa=X&ei=5G2zUdjYL8OniALc5IDwCQ&ved=0CDcQ9QEwAg&dur=3776

http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.spinachandyoga.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/mirror-tongue-diagnosis1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.spinachandyoga.com/ayurvedic-tongue-analysis/&h=1134&w=1384&sz=301&tbnid=vv4yFEoT2EwftM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=110&zoom=1&usg=__7YzSpl_NLp5eZ0nLC__S0iiY_yE=&docid=a-8jukxos4O2vM&sa=X&ei=5G2zUdjYL8OniALc5IDwCQ&ved=0CDEQ9QEwAA&dur=3574

So if you have Ama in your GI Tract, over time it may manage to broach the intestinal walls and make it into the bloodstream, where it "goes with the flow", till it arrives at a place where it's movement is stopped, say by a damaged blood vessel or where capillaries are too small for it to proceed, or a weak area in the system such as a genetic issue etc..

There it stops, and eventually another bit of ama will join it and another till at some point it basically sludges up the works.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atherosclerosis

(I am leaving out detail here as it would fill a book)

Ama gradually blocks off blood flow to the area, causing the local and downstream cells to be starved and thus their ability to do what they do is compromised.

Another angleon what happens in the area where Ama builds up is explained roughly here,by Dr Jerry Tennant,a fellow with an impressive resume. Dr Jerry Tennant on Healing is Voltage & Fulvic Acid Minerals (Eye Health)

BTW if this buildup is allowed to persist for a very long time it can become a bit dangerous to take things (drugs, herbs, treatments, etc) that will dislodge the sludge in the event that it makes it's way to the heart causing big problems.

If the person continues to eat whatever it is or do other things that create this Ama and do nothing to get rid of it like exercise, massage etc. then it builds to the point where the cells are into starvation mode and a part of the cell which Ay describes as being like your Mother (in that it unconditionally loves you and wants you to survive and thrive) goes into war mode and multiplies cells in that area at a rate beyond normal, because that is how it is programmed. (DNA)

Once you get to this stage, disease starts to manifest and it can be anything basically. Eventually it can become cancer. At the cancer stage Ay can only make you comfortable on your way to the great deli and happiness bar in the sky 


Now having said all of this about that, I have discovered since starting to eat a raw diet that a lot of the food rules seem to go out the window. For instance my body type doesn't do well with Honey and prior to eating raw I could not handle honey at all. Ay also says to never heat honey as it will become toxic.

Now I eat lots of it and with raw butter, rather than Ghee which is (cooked) clarified butter.

Also I have to eat considerably less food which is probably related to the fact that since raw food has it's nutrient value still intact, you don't get that starving feeling you get on a cooked diet.

AY says that your body has a natural intelligence that knows when you have eaten too much and with raw food that intelligence tells me I can eat a heck of a lot less food.

When taking my Ay Practitioner course the teacher told a story that Ay was written down at the time in history when the people started moving out of the hills and onto the plains to start farming. The farming was better, in that starvation could be kept at bay, but the food produced was not healthy and the people started getting diseases. The Doctors at the time (around the time of JC and the gang of 12  ) could see this happening, so they realized that their knowledge should be codified. This resulted in the Caraka Samhita, probably the most important of the various treatises on Ay to be written.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charaka_Samhita

[raw-al]

so in essence, since we all have some cancerous (mutated) cells, some apricot kernels would theoretically be excellent maintenance and any excess, regardless of how benign amygdalin may be without a cancerous enzyme, it still taxes the system. Taxes it like uncle Sam.

I recall a speech given by Dr D.Chopra in which he said that research has shown that our bodies produce cancer causing agents continuously and it also produces agents to curb cancer. It is like a continuous dance and as long as the good guys are winning then you are healthy.

Things "psychological" enter into the arena and weigh on the results of this dance.

I recall a close relative many years ago who had a spouse commit suicide. Within a year she had cancer.

[PaleoPhil]

Some sources said that laetrile is a man-modified form of amygdalin, so that grasses would naturally contain amygdalin, rather than laetrile. If laetrile is just natural amygdalin, why would anyone bother to change the name?

Everything I've seen here and elsewhere fits with amygdalin being a plant toxin (phytochemical) which may have medicinal benefits in certain doses and which it is also possible to accumulate an overload of, and even sellers of raw apricot seeds and advocates, such as in this thread and at http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk, indicate this when warning to not exceed a small intake like 35-40 seeds per day and to build up a tolerance. The most plausible mechanism of beneficial action is hormesis, which appears to be one of the key natural concepts least discussed at this forum.

It's interesting that fava beans are high in amygdalin per http://www.vitaminb17.org/foods.htm and that this is one of the foods regarded most toxic by most Paleo dieters. So there appears to be other phytochemicals to consider beyond just amygdalin and perhaps we should consider the foods as a whole rather than focus on one aspect of them.

It does indeed seem that amygdalin levels have been reduced in the diet, such as via domestication of nuts and berries, whereas the intakes of other plant toxins, such as gluten, have been increased via domestication. So the notion that higher intake of amydgalin might help is plausible. It's still also possible to overdo it and the level at which this can occur is reportedly much lower than with other foods like meat, fat and organs.

[aLptHW4k4y]

12.4 mg / 4 oz of kidney is not significant when our "daily recommendation" is 500 mg/day.

The RDA is more like 60mg as far as I know, not 500mg.

[raw-al]

Cure all Illnesses in 3 minutes!!! Spread LOVE not HATE!!!

[raw-al]

PP,
I finally got an excellent report from my friend with the Rife device. He is the one who cured my liver and prostate and cankers.

This site has the program "Spooky" that he and a few others have developed in order to control the device that they discovered on Ebay for around 70 USD that has been used to cure an incredible # of diseases including cancer as you will read in this link
http://www.cancerclinic.co.nz/downloads-3/files/Johann%20on%20Cancer.pdf

They are now working on making the device capable of diagnosis which will be a quantum leap especially for a device in this price range. The new version will be more expensive maybe in the 120 dollar range.
This author as well as the other author John White are programmers and have donated their programming for free. The device is sold by a company from China. They have also written a comprehensive manual for same.

[sabertooth]

I have been theorizing a number of alternative cancer thoeries and would like some others input.

Medical science has it wrong when it comes to the underlying cause of most infectious disease, and I believe they are in many ways totally ignorant about the nature of cancer and its biological function.

First of all cancer is a normal biological process that has occurred throughout biological history. Healthy animals will develop cancerous cells lifetime without any malignancy at all. Often small tumors will form and be removed by the bodies deffences without issue. Cancer is a symptom of some environmental imbalance. Cancer only becomes an issue when the body's cleansing and immune functions are so impaired that it can no longer contain cancer cells.

Still I cant help but to wonder if these cancer cells are not just some random mutation which causes the cell to go out of control. Is it possible that these small clusters of aderant cells form around tissue that is already toxic and diseased. Is it possible that these tumors contain the deaseased tissue, as a way to protect the rest of the body. In people who have some capability of rejuvenation these tumors are contained and in most cases the bodies immune system is able to clear them away before they are even noticed.

Countless people have lived a reasonable healthy and long life while carrying such cancers. Like other infectious disease , cancer only becomes life threatening if the body it to toxic and immune function to weak to contain and eliminate properly.

Medical science is completely ignorant of this view of cancer. By cutting out tumors, radiating and poisoning the body they are perpetrating a great crime against humanity. Countless people who with some basic lifestyle changes could put most cancers into remission are being murdered by barbaric treatments conducted by CANCER FARMERS. 

[raw-al]

PP You might consider learning about New German Medicine and Pleomorphism.