On
29/8/2003, Sandra (A Time For Peace) posted:
In a "World Without Cancer" by G Edward Griffin, he says that consuming
7 apricot kernels a day will ensure you never get cancer. If you have
cancer, then the dose is much higher, about 6 per hour.
Apricots have a fairely short season, approx 4 months. Even for
prophylactic usage, this would mean the purchase of 2,555 apricots not
allowing for any bad seeds. 2,600 would be more appropriate. This would
mean that 162 apricots would have to be purchased each week. I know
that I could not consume 162 apricots in a week, so much of the fruit
would be wasted,
not to mention the expense.
My Health Food Shop sells 200mls cold pressed apricot oil for $9:50.
Does anyone know if B17 or Laetrile is present in the cold pressed oil?
And if so, how much should be taken to represent 7 kernels?
Thornton added:
That is why you won't die from cancer. You won't live long enough
for it to develop. ;-(
Sandra
replied:
I haven't read the book. I got the
info off the Net. However, re cyanide, I believe that it is only
harmful if extracted and administered separately from the rest of the
kernel's makeup. I remember the apricot kernel thing going around about
30 years ago and people discussing the presence of cyanide. Apparently
it is harmless. I think it is a bit like eggs containing cholesterol,
but one's cholesterol does not rise from eating a lot of eggs.
In fact it has the reverse effect,
or so I have been told.
Podargus responded:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9832674&dopt=Abstract
Acute cyanide toxicity caused by apricot kernel ingestion.
Suchard JR, Wallace KL, Gerkin RD.
Department of Medical Toxicology, Good Samaritan Regional Medical
Center,
Phoenix, AZ, USA. jsuchard@samaritan.edu
A 41-year-old woman ingested apricot kernels purchased at a health food
store and became weak and dyspneic within 20 minutes. The patient was
comatose and hypothermic on presentation but responded promptly to
antidotal therapy for cyanide poisoning. She was later treated with a
continuous thiosulfate infusion for persistent metabolic acidosis. This
is the first reported case of cyanide toxicity from apricot kernel
ingestion in the United States since 1979.
PMID: 9832674 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.esr.cri.nz/features/surveillance/2003/03%20March/R-Mar03.pdf
indicates a death from ingesting equivalent of 60 kernels.
Cyanide is common in the diet, especially if you eat plenty of leafy
green veggies. However we are quite good at coping with it, so
small amounts are not going to cause a lot of problems. There is
obviously a danger though in eating amounts that are not in the range
that we have evolved to cope with.
Rob
Geraghty added:
Check the links I sent. One
of them is clearly a company which is promoting the use of apricot
kernels, but also warns against overuse. So I don't think it's
true to say it's harmless. I do think you should be cautious.
Simply because something is from nature and not purified artificially
or chemically synthesised, it's not necessarily safe.
Sandra replied:
I have been to Shea-butter.com. I do not have any faith in the National
Cancer Institute of the USA, nor their claim that laetrile is an
ineffective cancer treatment.
The site also recommends getting rid of cradle cap. My gibbon always
had cradle cap all over her body. She smelled clean and her fur was
always shiny and healthy. I did not remove the cradle cap from my
daughters scalps and they never needed to wash their hair. It was
always clean shiny and healthy until my neighbour interfered and washed
their hair at her house without my permission. Since then they
have had to wash their hair every few days. She did my daughters and
myself a disservice.
Apricot Power.com was reasonable. I may even place an order with them,
however I would prefer to eat the flesh along with the kernel, so as
not to separate them from the whole fruit.
Of course I wouldn't dream of eating 64 kernel at one time. I wouldn't
eat 64 of anything.
No one has answered my question and that was, is Vitamin B 17 still in
cold pressed apricot kernel oil?
Ray
responded:
The dreaded cholesterol!
In case of any readers who are not
aware, the rule for cholesterol is one of moderation in
consumption, because cholesterol is an essential metabolic substance.
Cholesterol is a base material for
the production of steroids such as testosterone and oestrogen, as well
as being a component for the manufacture of bile and bile salts.
Of problematic cholesterol
overload, it may well be, I think, that dangerous deposits in the
vascular system are controllable through a balancing act for other
substances in diet.
Stephen Berry wrote:
G´day Sandra, I think you have been misinformed. Cyanide is
a cumulative poison that is not easily expelled from the body.
Many old time blacksmiths died from making their own case
hardening compounds using dried apricot kernals as the main ingredient.
Ian
Musgrave commented:
At 01:29 31/08/03 +1000,
Susan wrote:
>Rob,
>I have been to Shea-butter.com. I do not have any faith in the
National
>Cancer Institute of the USA, nor their claim that laetrile is an
ineffective
>cancer treatment.
Why not? After all, the ability of
"laetrile" to cure/prevent cancer has been shown to be ineffective, by
scientific testing.
>Apricot
Power.com was reasonable.
On what basis? Why is a site
devoted to selling a product more trustworthy than a group of
scientists devoted to finding preventative strategies and therapies
against cancer?
>I may even
place an order with them,
>however I would prefer to eat the flesh along with the kernel, so
as not to
>separate them from the whole fruit.
Eating apricot kernels will not
prevent, nor cure, cancer. (and cyanide's ability to kill is not
dependent on whether it is refined or part of plant material). Don't
waste your money (but do buy and eat fresh apricots from your local
fruiterer).
Eating a diet rich in fresh fruit
and vegetables will reduce the likelihood of cancer (and heart attack
and stroke).
Podargus added:
And you can still have some cyanide in your diet.
Ian replied to a post from Sandra:
At 06:06 1/09/03 +1000, Sandra wrote:
>Ian and Pet,
>Do you really want your questions answered, or were they rhetorical?
No, I really want the questions answered. If science matters, why do
people accept or reject certain kinds of scientific evidence? Why are
careful double blind experiments less persuasive than anecdotal
evidence?
and to Ray:
>...............................................but
I would still be wanting
barium X-rays or CAT from
> authentic, and proven, scientific medicine for diagnosis.
Before I have a
> 20 kilo tumour to worry about....
Ray,
This certainly an area where I admire science. I think their diagnostic
tools are useful, though even they can cause some harm, such as X Ray.
All your other points are taken.
I met a psychic healer and surgen once who put their patient up against
a white wall and made a complete diagnosis. Then performed the surgery,
in a few minutes the patient was ready to go home. Their success rate
was about 95%. I have had psychic surgery myself and was cured of one
thing, but not of another. I had two opperations on different parts of
my body.
Podargus, replying to Paul:
> This has a deep
'homeopathological' inference, in that imbibing seawater
> (5 picolitres perhaps?) would cure every ill known to man.
> Regards
> Paul
The problem with sea water is that it has detectable amounts of
'stuff', therefore would need diluting to be effective.
