LAETRILE THERAPY is probably the best known and most widely publicized of alternative cancer therapies. Laetrile, more than any other substance, epitomizes the scientific and philosophical controversy that has raged between supporters of alternative cancer therapies and the medical establishment. Background ( It is not a case of eating Apricot kernels as a treatment for cancer as the following paragraph shows.) This last sentence is my insertion Amygdalin is a member of a group of cyanide-containing substances called nitrilosides, which occur naturally in plants. The terms laetrile and amygdalin are often used interchangeably. Laetrile is a concentrated extract of amygdalin prepared from apricot kernels specifically for cancer therapy. The extraction process was developed by Dr. Ernst Krebs, Jr., who pioneered the use of laetrile in cancer therapy. (17) The Sloan-Kettering) Cover-up Ralph W. Moss gives an excellent overview of the political and scientific controversy that has surrounded laetrile in his book The Cancer Industry. He states, "Although spokespersons for orthodox medicine continue to deny that there have been any animal study data in favor of laetrile, this is contradicted by a number of studies, including—but not limited to—those at Sloan-Kettering." (15) Moss should know, because he was discharged by the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center when he revealed an apparent cover-up by authorities at Sloan-Kettering of positive findings about laetrile . Dr. Richard Passwater also reported that some of the positive findings in Sloan-Kettering's laetrile studies were selectively not reported. Also, it appears that some of the laetrile research was deliberately designed to fail. (18) Controversy and Confusion According to Ralph Moss, who worked at Sloan-Kettering for several years before being discharged, five years of testing laetrile at Sloan-Kettering ended in controversy and confusion—not a pleasing outcome for the leaders of the world's most prestigious private cancer center. In summary, about twenty experiments with laetrile produced positive results, while only a few experiments produced negative findings. Sloan-Kettering's Laetrile Report Finally, at a press conference in June 1977, Sloan-Kettering officials announced to the world the results of over five years of laetrile research. The verdict on laetrile from the respected laboratories of the world's most prestigious cancer research center turned out to be completely one-sided and negative. Some of the comments by Sloan-Kettering's top administrators at the laetrile press conference (13) were: We have no evidence that laetrile possesses any biological activity with respect to cancer, one way or the other.  —Lewis Thomas, president of Sloan-Kettering We have no reproducible evidence that amygdalin, or laetrile, is active. —Robert Good, director of Sloan-Kettering Laetrile has been found absolutely devoid of activity, period. —Daniel Martin, prominent cancer researcher Essentially, laetrile was pronounced completely ineffective in treating cancer, despite considerable evidence to the contrary. Laetrile is one of the naturally occurring substances that cannot be patented, making it a true orphan drug. No drug company is interested in committing money to research laetrile's potential. The only answer is good, unbiased government-sponsored research without the type of controversy that accompanied the Sloan-Kettering studies. These excerpts taken from the report at the link above. For me personally, I will never rely on just one product to help me beat the cancer I have. Cancer is a very nasty and devious thing, so use everything you can SAFELY use. Eliza. ... View more

It seems that there are several native bushes used as medicine plants. The Scaevola Spinescens is known by several different names. Another one is a member of the Willow family; I was told about it by a friend who lived in the outback and used it, but not as a cancer treatment. Here is a link to the Maroon Bush, I have a good supply of this and drink it regularly but would never rely on it to cure a cancer. Eliza. ... View more

https://www.cosa.org.au/media/1093/cosa_guidelines_safeprescribingchemo2008.pdf Clinical Oncological Society of Australia The above web address will take you to their very interesting site, some excerpts from it are below. A lot of the information given is about things I knew nothing -- even after a total of 14 cycles of chemo given in 2 States. The whole article is well worth a read. HAS ANYONE BEEN GIVEN ANY OF THE INFORMATION THAT IS RECOMMENDED ? " Patients should be given both written and oral information about their treatment to include all medications, expected side effects, how to take supportive medication and who to contact in the event of an emergency or severe adverse events. General and specific side effects expected from the treatment to include Immediate effects (e.g. hypersensitivity reactions, extravasation). Short term effects (e.g. nausea and vomiting, neutropenia, alopecia). Long term effects (e.g. infertility, carcinogenesis, cardiotoxicity). Where appropriate, information about potential teratogenic effect of cytotoxic agents and pregnancy precautions should be given Occupational health and Safety Precautions Capital spelling in the following sentence is mine. Chemotherapy is known to be MUTAGENIC, CARCINOGENIC, and TERATOGENIC. It is beyond the scope of this document to address the issues of safe handling and prevention of occupational exposure. Health care professionals should refer to individual state guidance on health and safety related to safe handing of chemotherapy and targeted therapy. With the wealth of information available through the internet it is useful to provide patients with a list of websites appropriate for them to obtain further evidence based information on their disease and treatment. Information should be given on the first visit and reinforced on subsequent visits. Questions regarding compliance, treatment tolerance, and adverse events must always be addressed at each appointment. Table 3 outlines suggested information that should be provided to patients. Table 5. Suggested content of treatment plan Patient name and TWO other unique identifiers (e.g. hospital number, date of birth) Diagnosis Name of the chemotherapy protocol to be given The date the it is intended that the treatment commences Intended duration of treatment and the no of cycles for treatment Tests to be performed after specified number of cycles Therapeutic goal of treatment (e.g. curative, palliative) xxxxxxxxxxx Details of other therapeutic modalities i.e. surgery, radiation Any treatment variations such as dose reductions If dose reduction occurs then the reduction factor should be clearly documented along with the reason for the reduction. e.g. Dose reduced to 75% of scheduled dose due to diarrhoea. " MEANINGS OF WORDS. CARCINOGENIC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinogenesis‎ Carcinogenesis or oncogenesis or tumorigenesis is literally the creation of cancer. It is a process by which normal cells are transformed into cancer cells. ‪Mutagen‬ From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search In genetics, a mutagen is a physical or chemical agent that changes the genetic material, usually DNA, of an organism and thus increases the frequency of mutations above the natural background level. As many mutations cause cancer, mutagens are therefore also likely to be carcinogens. Not all mutations are caused by mutagens: so-called "spontaneous mutations" occur due to spontaneous hydrolysis, errors in DNA replication, repair and recombination. Teratogenic | Define Teratogenic at Dictionary.com dictionary.reference.com/browse/teratogenic‎ ◦ Cached ◦ Similar a drug or other substance capable of interfering with the development of a fetus, causing birth defects. WITH THE MEANING OF THE TERM ----TERATOGENIC (above), WHY WOULD IT NOW BE CONSIDERED -- AND IT IS, TO ADMINISTER CHEMO DRUGS TO PREGNANT LADIES ???? Eliza. ... View more

Australian Oncologists findings with the 14 year research they did, were the reason that Mike Anderson made this film. Here is part of an interview he gave and a link to it. http://www.naturalnews.com/024948_cancer_WHO_health.html Excerpts of the interview are below. If you look, I give statistics at the beginning of the film, it was from a report done by a couple of oncologists in Australia, it looked at clinical trials for a 14-year period, up till 2004. What they showed was the treatments for all of our major cancers are totally ineffective. The unique thing about that study is that they used absolute numbers. That means that absolute versus relative numbers. If you take any study in the cancer industry and translate the results into absolute numbers, you're going to get that dismal result. Like 00000 success and 5-year survival rates for breast, uterine, whatever kind of cancer, cervical, whatever kind of cancer you want. Relative numbers mean just that. They're relative to something else, like a previous study, and they may show improvement. They're not 1 out of 100 people. I tell people, if you're up for some treatment you've got to go to your physician and say, "Out of 100 people, how many are going to benefit from this?" Well, the physician, let's take tamoxifen for example. The physician will say, "Well, if you take tamoxifen for five years, it's going to reduce your chances of breast cancer recurrence by 40%. That is a bald-faced lie. That's a relative number. If you take the absolute number, it's only 1.6 people out of 100, instead of you get the impression well, 49 people out of 100 are going to benefit from this. But it's only 1.6, and that's what the patient needs to know. That could happen by chance, it's so low. It could be a placebo effect, it's so low. If anything in this article is indeed not correct, it would be certain that the author would have been in court very quickly. This is an American report - and I think we all know where litigation came from. I have ordered the DVD from this ebay store, will get it next week. http://www.8lions.com.au/videos/healing-cancer-inside-out-mike-anderson After about 700 hours of researching cancer, nothing surprises me anymore about the "cancer industry." 5 months ago about all that I really knew of cancer was that you had to have chemo and or radiation to cure it. It has become a near full time job to learn as much as I can about this awful condition. At first a lot of the articles I read I could not believe; then as I read more, and of court cases ( that BIG PHARMA lost ); and whistle-blower from the FDA - the Food and Drug Administration in U.S.A. I had to start believing that what is written is correct. I have been very careful to only believe what comes from a credible source - from cancer research centres etc from different countries. As I have stage 4 Ovarian cancer that metastasised -3 tumours in my lungs and more evidence ( PET Scan ), of further mets., I thought I had better know what I was dealing with. 14 rounds of chemo later - over 2 years, I was in remission. I know that if I leave it to the oncologists I will be dead in about 2 -3 years. I was told this - but not so bluntly. That means having more chemo which has affected me badly already. I am determined that I can do what a lot of other people have done, and rid myself of cancer by changing the way I eat. Over the last 4 months of chemo I had changed my diet, did not bother telling the oncologist, and he said at one appointment that I was doing " extremely well " I had asked - what can I do to help myself - the answer - Vitamin D. Which I do take in liquid form, along with a lot of other supplements. Knowledge is power - so if you want to give yourself a better chance of living, start researching. I made the mistake in thinking - like so many others, that the oncologists would cure us. Eliza. ... View more

Hi, I've read the posts in the Community but this is the first time I've attempted to join in. My name is Eliza, and I have Ovarian cancer, diagnosed early last year while on holiday in Tasmania. Major surgery and 8 Chemo. treatments later ( in Vic) my Ca125 marker had gone down to 16. We came back to W.A., had a check-up and found the markers had started to go up again so I'm now back having chemo. It surely is a nasty cancer, and has spread, but I'm determined that I will beat it. I have asked the oncologists I have seen for any advice on what I can do to help myself, but drew a big blank. So, back to the computer, and the Cancer Council. Thank goodness for all the info - and help that is available. Cheers, Eliza ... View more