No, not the bomber.
I have been doing some research into some cancer treatments and the like. Mainly because I got a little neurotic after I quit smoking and wanted to clear out anything that may cause cancer in the future. Plus I want to eat more healthy.
Anyway, I found some compelling information that I would like to share about a Vitamin called B17. It is found in many different foods, but is in such low concentrations in many of them that it has little to no benefit or are in parts of the foods we have available, but don't eat, like apple seeds, and peach or plum kernels (inside the pit).
The interesting thing about this vitamin is that it attacks cancerous cells, or trophoblasts.
Basically there are two toxins in the B17 that are harmlessly folded between two glucose. In the conditions found only in a cancerous cell, the glucose is unfolded and the two toxins are combined together and kill the cell very efficiently. In normal cells, they are rarely unfolded and, if they are unfolded, there are chemistries found only in normal cells that will transform the toxins into helpful sugars.
Needless to say, you probably have never heard of B17.
You can find out more about B17 and the reasons why you never hear about it at these sites:
http://www.vitaminb17.org/
http://www.curezone.com/foods/laetrile.asp
Also, if you google you can find some too.
Anyway, thought I would share it and hope to keep you all informed. :)
And as a side note, I have found some research that says that smoking doesn't cause cancer, so my whole reason for doing the research perhaps was unfounded. Go fig. :)
Poor nutrition and radioactivity are the main causes of it.
But that's for another post.
5 comments:
and i'm glad that a lifelong smoker, who is not a doctor, has single-handedly debunked this myth. second hand smoke i agree, the jury is out, but mostly signs point to no. also he only pays primary attention to pipe & cigar smoking, which it is well know to generally have a reduced risk vs cigarettes, mainly due to reduced ammounts smoked. oh, and he also says that pipe & cigar smoking increase life expectency. the guy is a crackpot like those who preach proof that evolution is just a 'theory' not fact.
as far as smoking not causing cancer, well here's what phillip morris says:(interesting note l. cloby claimes that the surgeon general's reports are imposible to get, but they are all right there on this page in pdf format)
http://www.philipmorrisusa.com/en/health_issues/cigarette_smoking_and_disease.asp
oh, you say,that's just because the government forces them to,
well... here's the international site i don't think we can force them to say it for their international advertising:
http://www.philipmorrisinternational.com/pages/eng/smoking/Health_effects.asp
and frankly i trust the ama, who, surgeon general, new england journal of medicine, et al much more than some crackpot with a conspiracy theory. and if you want crackpot conspiracy theories go here : http://www.abovetopsecret.com/
To be honest, I disagree DH8.
I don't trust government agencies to give me the straight dope about anything.
Granted, taking JUST the word from the link psuche gave would be grounds for my dismissal as an intelligent person, but it is NOT my only source.
I have found a few other sources, one is the first link I gave, that give stikingly similar accounts for why the AMA among other government and "non-profit" agencies are lying to us, about a great many things.
So read both sources and notice that the one overriding thing is CANCER.
Not cancer, but CANCER.
Why? Because CANCER research is a $200 billion industry. While cancer is just a nutrition imbalance.
It would make the whole CANCER research thing pointless if the answer to solving cancer was eating a few more apple seeds a day wouldn't it?
Think about it and the track record of the government on these types of things.
They used the tobacco industry as an excuse for cancer to dilute information pertaining to the cure and prevention of cancer.
Go fig.
don't trust, government agencies, private corperations, lobby groups, special interest, charties, all that you have left is the crackpots. the ama & new england journal of medicine are not gvt agencies (nejm has many articles on second hand smoke having no connection to cancer but they also support somking + inc cancer) but any conspiracy theory which puts the blame in anothers court aka cancer research is giving smoking a bad name?!? come on it reeks of conspiracy theory. oh, cancer is just a nutritional imbalance, been reading the hippie conspiricies i see, been inundated with those in the past myself problem is both sides are right nature & nurture go hand in hand. smoking makes you more likely to get a potentially terminal illness. a good diet makes you less likely to get them. but in neither instance is it a guarentee. i'm going to get fuller into this on my blog, because it is no longer about what is or is not but conspiracies, which are a whole nother animal.
in some cases it is not about making your own decisions. smoking either does or does not increase chances of cancer. my opinion & your opinion do not change this. using faulty logic and paranoia to base decisions upon, to discount the lions share of all scientific research in favor of a fractional segment of non-legitamate sources and then touting it as fact is the same as christians using their proofs that evolution doesn't happen, that noah's flood was real and the earth is 6000 years old. when you start discounting science, real science, not wack jobs with an opinion, because another theory prays on you own distrust of institutions, then you have given up rationality in favor of delusion.
just on an aside, to the b-17 cover-up, that conspiracy seems to have some potential merit.
Post a Comment