posted June 28, 2010 01:16 AM         

I've got to hand it to you for challenging me. After spending the last 24 hours reading about Eskimos, Polar Bears, Ardipithecus Ramidus, cyanide, and a host of other things, I think I'm ready to meet the challenge. We'll see what you think.

First off, I want to congratulate you on being right about the B17, and admit that I was mistaken to point the finger squarely at animal protein consumption. Having said that, I'm still going to proceed to continue to argue in favor of the methods I've already supported, and I'll share my solid reasons for that. But before I get into it, let me thank you for bringing this issue to my attention, and for doing it in a polite way.

The first thing I want to emphasize is the extent to which we are, essentially, saying the same thing, when you refer to a "B17 deficiency" being the cause of cancer, and I cite a lack of assimilable fruits and vegetables in the diet. The inclusion of juices which I'm proposing provides more than enough B17 to ward off deficiency, even with a diet high in animal proteins (which I'm not proposing). The question of whether or not it is enough to cure a malignant cancer tumor is a more complex matter, but this complexity applies no less to the Eskimos. Since the Eskimos did not have deficiency, it is difficult to judge how their diet might have held up as a remedy or treatment, rather than a preventative lifestyle. The only evidence we can resort to concerns the Eskimos who converted to a westernized diet. What we find is this:

quote:

---

"An interesting point to note is that when an Eskimo leaves his traditional way of life and begins to rely on a western/modern diet he becomes even more cancer prone than the average America."
http://pa-in.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=18951033792&topic=6738

---

Without insisting that there is just one conclusion to which this evidence leads, I will suggest, as a strong hypothesis, that it is on account of their former dietary habits (high in animal proteins and low in plant life) that they tend to succumb so quickly in our environment. First, we need to look at how B17 (Laetrile) works:

quote:

---

The vitamin is harmless to healthy tissue for a very simple reason: each molecule of B17 contains one unit of cyanide, one unit of benzaldehyde and two of glucose (sugar) tightly locked together. In order for the cyanide to become dangerous it is first necessary to 'unlock' the molecule to release it, a trick that can only be performed by an enzyme called beta-glucosidase, which is present all over the human body in minute quantities, but in truly vast quantities (up to 100 times as high) at only one place: the site of a malignant cancer tumor. Thus the cyanide is unlocked only at the cancer site with drastic results, which become utterly devastating to the cancer cells because the benzaldehyde unit unlocks at the same time. Benzaldehyde is a deadly poison in its own right, which then acts synergistically with the cyanide to produce a poison 100 times more deadly than either in isolation. The combined effect on the cancer cells is best left to the imagination. But what about danger to the rest of the body's cells? Another enzyme, rhodanese, always present in far larger quantities than the unlocking enzyme beta-glucosidase in healthy tissues, has the easy ability to completely break down both cyanide and benzaldehyde into beneficial body products. Predictably perhaps, malignant cancer cells contain no rhodanese at all, leaving them completely at the mercy of the two deadly poisons.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/salud/salud_defeatcancer09.htm

---

and:

quote:

---

"ENZYMES - Are absolutely ESSENTIAL if you want to benefit from vitamin B17. You must take some form of proteolytic enzyme to break down the protein coating surrounding cancer cells. Dr Beard back in the later 1800s used Enzymes very effectively to treat cancer patients. Simply put, the enzymes knock out the cancer cells first line of defense which is a protein coating and then the body and/or B17 can do its work and kill off the cancer cells."
www.laetrile.com.au

---

Basically, the problem with the Eskimo diet is that enzymes are needed to brake down the protein surrounding the cancer cells, but since there's a lack of enzyme-rich foods in their diets, and since they consume large amounts of animal protein, enzymes must be leached from the bones, both to break down the meat and the cancer cell walls. This would easily explain the prevalence of osteoporosis among the Eskimo.

See: http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/search/label/Eskimo%20Diet%20and%20Health
http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2010/03/paleo-diet-ph-does-it-matter-part-ii.html

What we find is that, while Cancer may be prevented, health is not at all ensured. In the same way, by taking Vitamin C, one may be sure not to develop scurvy, but not everyone who is free of scurvy is healthy. As we see in the case of the Eskimo, there is no shortcut to health. You may avoid one disease, but the result will be another disease, as well as a lifetime of less than optimal health. It was for good reason that the Eskimo highly prized plant foods and would often go to great lengths to obtain them. Not for the vitamins or the minerals, but for the enzymes.

We have only to consider the standard western diet, to see how much more necessary this is for us. Most people are eating just as the Eskimos ate -- a preponderance of animal proteins and a scarce amount of raw, live foods, -- but with a few major differences. For one thing, the meat isn't as clean, and neither are the plants. They're full of toxins, and they lack the B17 content of the arctic foods. Even the folks who are eating 100% organic haven't reversed the portions; they still consume mostly animal proteins (and carbohydrates), and the vegetables they eat are seldom raw, but almost always cooked and drained of nearly all their nutritional content. And this has been going on for years. In other words, cancer, and the conditions supportive of cancer, have been building steadily in their bodies for most of their lives. This includes the habit energy which keeps them locked in their shallow dietary routines. Taking a B17 supplement, or downing apricot seeds, may burn the cancer out with cyanide, but it won't restore health, and it will leach the bones. Accomplishing true, deep healing requires an honest lifestyle change. In this environment, that means colon hydrotherapy and a diet dominated by fresh, live, raw, organic fruits and vegetables. For the westernized Eskimo, this would be doubly true.

Besides this, there are obvious environmental and ethical considerations which, some might even say, trump the considerations of personal well-being. Just to name a few:

quote:

---

A study conducted by the Institute for Ecological Economy Research concluded that a meat-eater’s diet is responsible for more than 7 times as much greenhouse gas emissions as a vegan’s diet. On average a person switching from the standard American diet to a vegan diet will prevent the abuse and killing of over 100 animals per year. And you save more water by not eating a pound of beef than you do by not showering for an entire year. Now a new United Nations report calls cattle the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. Cattle are ‘responsible for 18%++ of greenhouse gases, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.’ This includes the fuel burned making fertilizer, to produce the meat and transport it, as well as the obvious cow fart and manure production of methane, 20 times more effective as a global warmer as CO2. It takes 2,500 gallons of water to produce a pound of meat, but only 60 gallons to water to produce a pound of wheat! And nearly 10 billion animals raised and slaughtered for food in the U.S. every year.
http://girliegirlarmy.com/blog/20100222/got-plants-is-animal-protein-necessary/

---

Lastly, we might consider the condition of our evolutionary ancestors:

quote:

---

It turns out that we originated from a cooperative creature, as opposed to a competitive creature. This speaks powerfully to rethinking the justifications many of us use about oppression, competition, and war just being “in our nature”. Top that with Ardi being a broken-forest dweller without enlarged canines, who’s on a plant-based diet!"
http://www.thediscerningbrute.com/2009/10/09/discovery-of-the-century/

The nearly complete fossil of a 4.4-million-year-old human ancestor, a female dubbed "Ardi," is rewriting the story of human origins, paleontologists reported Thursday.

"The analysis of Ardipithecus ramidus (it means "root of the ground ape"), reported in the journal Science, changes the notion that humans and chimps, our closest genetic cousins, both trace their lineage to a creature that was more like today's chimp. Rather, the research suggests that their common ancestor was a walking forest forager more cooperative in nature than the competitive, aggressive chimp... "
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2009-10-01-human-chimp-fossil_N.htm

---

And, of course, our own anatomy:

quote:

---

“The saliva of carnivorous animals does not contain digestive enzymes. When eating, a mammalian carnivore gorges itself rapidly and does not chew its food. Since proteolytic (protein-digesting) enzymes cannot be liberated in the mouth due to the danger of autodigestion (damaging the oral cavity), carnivores do not need to mix their food with saliva; they simply bite off huge chunks of meat and swallow them whole.

According to evolutionary theory, the anatomical features consistent with an herbivorous diet represent a more recently derived condition than that of the carnivore. Herbivorous mammals have well-developed facial musculature, fleshy lips, a relatively small opening into the oral cavity and a thickened, muscular tongue. The lips aid in the movement of food into the mouth and, along with the facial (cheek) musculature and tongue, assist in the chewing of food. In herbivores, the jaw joint has moved to position above the plane of the teeth. Although this type of joint is less stable than the hinge-type joint of the carnivore, it is much more mobile and allows the complex jaw motions needed when chewing plant foods. Additionally, this type of jaw joint allows the upper and lower cheek teeth to come together along the length of the jaw more or less at once when the mouth is closed in order to form grinding platforms. (This type of joint is so important to a plant-eating animal, that it is believed to have evolved at least 15 different times in various plant-eating mammalian species.) The angle of the mandible has expanded to provide a broad area of attachment for the well-developed masseter and pterygoid muscles (these are the major muscles of chewing in plant-eating animals). The temporalis muscle is small and of minor importance. The masseter and pterygoid muscles hold the mandible in a sling-like arrangement and swing the jaw from side-to-side. Accordingly, the lower jaw of plant-eating mammals has a pronounced sideways motion when eating. This lateral movement is necessary for the grinding motion of chewing.

The dentition of herbivores is quite varied depending on the kind of vegetation a particular species is adapted to eat. Although these animals differ in the types and numbers of teeth they posses, the various kinds of teeth when present, share common structural features. The incisors are broad, flattened and spade-like. Canines may be small as in horses, prominent as in hippos, pigs and some primates (these are thought to be used for defense) or absent altogether. The molars, in general, are squared and flattened on top to provide a grinding surface. The molars cannot vertically slide past one another in a shearing/slicing motion, but they do horizontally slide across one another to crush and grind. The surface features of the molars vary depending on the type of plant material the animal eats. The teeth of herbivorous animals are closely grouped so that the incisors form an efficient cropping/biting mechanism, and the upper and lower molars form extended platforms for crushing and grinding. The “walled-in” oral cavity has a lot of potential space that is realized during eating.”
http://www.vegsource.com/news/2009/11/the-comparative-anatomy-of-eating.html

---

I think that about sums it up. How'd I do?

posted June 28, 2010 08:27 AM         

Charlotte Gerson includes a small B17 supplement in her treatment, which I found interesting. I did read somewhere that flax oil doesn't contain B17, but the flax particulate does, so I'm going to include more of the crushed seed, although I already get more than enough from other plant sources to avoid deficiency. The oil is still extremely valuable, but for other reasons.

More sources of B17:

Apple seeds, apricot kernels, bamboo shoots, barley, beet tops, bitter almond, blackberries, boysenberries, brewers yeast, brown rice, buckwheat, cashews, cassava, cherry kernels, cranberries, currants, eucalyptus leaves, fava beans, flax seeds, garbanzo beans, gooseberries, huckleberries, lentils, lima beans, loganberries, macadamia nuts, millet, millet seed, mung beans, nectarines, peach kernels, pecans, plum kernels, prunes, quince, raspberries, spinach and sprouts.