Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Bodybuilding Boards => Nutrition, Products & Supplements Info => Topic started by: nycbull on November 24, 2008, 12:54:53 PM
-
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/news-keeps-getting-worse-for-vitamins/?em
NEW YORK TIMES
News Keeps Getting Worse for Vitamins
The best efforts of the scientific community to prove the health benefits of vitamins keep falling short.
Consumers don’t want to give up their vitamins. (Tony Cenicola/The New York Times)This week, researchers reported the disappointing results from a large clinical trial of almost 15,000 male doctors taking vitamins E and C for a decade. The study showed no meaningful effect on cancer rates.
Another recent study found no benefit of vitamins E and C for heart disease.
In October, a major trial studying whether vitamin E and selenium could lower a man’s risk for prostate cancer ended amidst worries that the treatments may do more harm than good.
And recently, doctors at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York warned that vitamin C seems to protect not just healthy cells but cancer cells, too.
Everyone needs vitamins, which are critical for the body. But for most people, the micronutrients we get from foods usually are adequate to prevent vitamin deficiency, which is rare in the United States. That said, some extra vitamins have proven benefits, such as vitamin B12 supplements for the elderly and folic acid for women of child-bearing age. And calcium and vitamin D in women over 65 appear to protect bone health.
But many people gobble down large doses of vitamins believing that they boost the body’s ability to mop up damaging free radicals that lead to cancer and heart disease. In addition to the more recent research, several reports in recent years have challenged the notion that megadoses of vitamins are good for you.
A Johns Hopkins School of Medicine review of 19 vitamin E clinical trials of more than 135,000 people showed high doses of vitamin E (greater than 400 IUs) increased a person’s risk for dying during the study period by 4 percent. Taking vitamin E with other vitamins and minerals resulted in a 6 percent higher risk of dying. Another study of daily vitamin E showed vitamin E takers had a 13 percent higher risk for heart failure.
The Journal of Clinical Oncology published a study of 540 patients with head and neck cancer who were being treated with radiation therapy. Vitamin E reduced side effects, but cancer recurrence rates among the vitamin users were higher, although the increase didn’t reach statistical significance.
A 1994 Finland study of smokers taking 20 milligrams a day of beta carotene showed an 18 percent higher incidence of lung cancer among beta carotene users. In 1996, a study called Caret looked at beta carotene and vitamin A use among smokers and workers exposed to asbestos, but the study was stopped when the vitamin users showed a 28 percent higher risk for lung cancer and a 26 percent higher risk of dying from heart disease.
A 2002 Harvard study of more than 72,000 nurses showed that those who consumed high levels of vitamin A from foods, multivitamins and supplements had a 48 percent higher risk for hip fractures than nurses who had the lowest intake of vitamin A.
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews looked at vitamin C studies for treating colds. Among more than two dozen studies, there was no overall benefit for preventing colds, although the vitamin was linked with a 50 percent reduction in colds among people who engaged in extreme activities, such as marathon runners, skiers and soldiers, who were exposed to significant cold or physical stress. The data also suggested vitamin C use was linked with less severe and slightly shorter colds.
In October 2004, Copenhagen researchers reviewed seven randomized trials of beta carotene, selenium and vitamins A, C and E (alone or in combination) in colon, esophageal, gastric, pancreatic and liver cancer. The antioxidant users had a 6 percent higher death rate than placebo users.
Two studies presented to the American College of Cardiology in 2006 showed that vitamin B doesn’t prevent heart attacks, leading The New England Journal of Medicine to say that the consistency of the results “leads to the unequivocal conclusion” that the vitamins don’t help patients with established vascular disease.
The British Medical Journal looked at multivitamin use among elderly people for a year but found no difference in infection rates or visits to doctors.
Despite a lack of evidence that vitamins actually work, consumers appear largely unwilling to give them up. Many readers of the Well blog say the problem is not the vitamin but poorly designed studies that use the wrong type of vitamin, setting the vitamin up to fail. Industry groups such as the Council for Responsible Nutrition also say the research isn’t well designed to detect benefits in healthy vitamin users.
-
good will stop people from wasting their money on supplements.
jt
-
steroids> vitamins
-
there is a big difference between taking a multi-vitamin and mineral supplement daily, and the mega-doses of individual vitamins that some people take.
everything in moderation
-
They failed to mention that synthetic vitamin E was used ::)
i dont understand, why is that worse?
-
Studies, BAH, i'll stick with my vits!
-
i dont understand, why is that worse?
Thats like a doctor setting up a study on steroids and their effectiveness on building muscle. The doctor then gives all subjects catabolic steroids (that tear down muscle) rather than anabolic steroids (that build muscle)....8 weeks later the doctor measures everyones strength and body mass compisition and compares it to their pre-drug numbers....then he acts suprised that every test subject is not bigger or stronger...he then deducing that steroids actually breakdown muscle
hey cholesterol is technically a steroid....so it must be the same as Anadrol 50 right?? Wrong!
PS- I Think body lacks receptors for synthetic vitamin e
-
wrong board guy
old news guy
bad research guy
-
Megadosing vitamins is detrimental to one's health. People need to get the fuck back to nature. You don't find those levels of vitamins and minerals in natural wholesome food. People just need to fucking eat better. Raw milk, eggs, meat, lots of fruits and veggies and maybe a few vitmains like niacin, flax seed, etc. But only in moderation and on the conservative side in my opinion. If people just ate better they wouldn't need vitamins.
-
Megadosing vitamins is detrimental to one's health. People need to get the fuck back to nature. You don't find those levels of vitamins and minerals in natural wholesome food. People just need to fucking eat better. Raw milk, eggs, meat, lots of fruits and veggies and maybe a few vitmains like niacin, flax seed, etc. But only in moderation and on the conservative side in my opinion. If people just ate better they wouldn't need vitamins.
milk?
you know that in the majority of humans lactase levels decline after breastfeeding begins which indicates that milk is to be weened off.Many ethnicities lack enough lactase to take care of consumption, i doubt milk is a solid choice here.
-
wrong board ####
old news ####
bad research ####
how is this old news?, and its the NY Times, most reliable source.
-
Vitamin Supplements will fall by the wayside eventually. Especially if a trend in certain Cancers can be observed.
-
Vitamin Supplements will fall by the wayside eventually. Especially if a trend in certain Cancers can be observed.
How do you mean?
-
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/news-keeps-getting-worse-for-vitamins/?em
NEW YORK TIMES
News Keeps Getting Worse for Vitamins
The best efforts of the scientific community to prove the health benefits of vitamins keep falling short.
Consumers don’t want to give up their vitamins. (Tony Cenicola/The New York Times)This week, researchers reported the disappointing results from a large clinical trial of almost 15,000 male doctors taking vitamins E and C for a decade. The study showed no meaningful effect on cancer rates.
Another recent study found no benefit of vitamins E and C for heart disease.
In October, a major trial studying whether vitamin E and selenium could lower a man’s risk for prostate cancer ended amidst worries that the treatments may do more harm than good.
And recently, doctors at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York warned that vitamin C seems to protect not just healthy cells but cancer cells, too.
Everyone needs vitamins, which are critical for the body. But for most people, the micronutrients we get from foods usually are adequate to prevent vitamin deficiency, which is rare in the United States. That said, some extra vitamins have proven benefits, such as vitamin B12 supplements for the elderly and folic acid for women of child-bearing age. And calcium and vitamin D in women over 65 appear to protect bone health.
But many people gobble down large doses of vitamins believing that they boost the body’s ability to mop up damaging free radicals that lead to cancer and heart disease. In addition to the more recent research, several reports in recent years have challenged the notion that megadoses of vitamins are good for you.
A Johns Hopkins School of Medicine review of 19 vitamin E clinical trials of more than 135,000 people showed high doses of vitamin E (greater than 400 IUs) increased a person’s risk for dying during the study period by 4 percent. Taking vitamin E with other vitamins and minerals resulted in a 6 percent higher risk of dying. Another study of daily vitamin E showed vitamin E takers had a 13 percent higher risk for heart failure.
The Journal of Clinical Oncology published a study of 540 patients with head and neck cancer who were being treated with radiation therapy. Vitamin E reduced side effects, but cancer recurrence rates among the vitamin users were higher, although the increase didn’t reach statistical significance.
A 1994 Finland study of smokers taking 20 milligrams a day of beta carotene showed an 18 percent higher incidence of lung cancer among beta carotene users. In 1996, a study called Caret looked at beta carotene and vitamin A use among smokers and workers exposed to asbestos, but the study was stopped when the vitamin users showed a 28 percent higher risk for lung cancer and a 26 percent higher risk of dying from heart disease.
A 2002 Harvard study of more than 72,000 nurses showed that those who consumed high levels of vitamin A from foods, multivitamins and supplements had a 48 percent higher risk for hip fractures than nurses who had the lowest intake of vitamin A.
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews looked at vitamin C studies for treating colds. Among more than two dozen studies, there was no overall benefit for preventing colds, although the vitamin was linked with a 50 percent reduction in colds among people who engaged in extreme activities, such as marathon runners, skiers and soldiers, who were exposed to significant cold or physical stress. The data also suggested vitamin C use was linked with less severe and slightly shorter colds.
In October 2004, Copenhagen researchers reviewed seven randomized trials of beta carotene, selenium and vitamins A, C and E (alone or in combination) in colon, esophageal, gastric, pancreatic and liver cancer. The antioxidant users had a 6 percent higher death rate than placebo users.
Two studies presented to the American College of Cardiology in 2006 showed that vitamin B doesn’t prevent heart attacks, leading The New England Journal of Medicine to say that the consistency of the results “leads to the unequivocal conclusion” that the vitamins don’t help patients with established vascular disease.
The British Medical Journal looked at multivitamin use among elderly people for a year but found no difference in infection rates or visits to doctors.
Despite a lack of evidence that vitamins actually work, consumers appear largely unwilling to give them up. Many readers of the Well blog say the problem is not the vitamin but poorly designed studies that use the wrong type of vitamin, setting the vitamin up to fail. Industry groups such as the Council for Responsible Nutrition also say the research isn’t well designed to detect benefits in healthy vitamin users.
It's all about balance. I did not hear of anyones eating habits or exercise habits in these studies. Vitamins are not a magic bullet but in combination with a healthy lifestyle they are beneficial. High does of anything will kill you, and it seems these studies like to mega dose people. All bullshit propaganda to further the profits of the pharmaceutical companies.BAHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
-
Damn I usually take a vitamin C every day but I'm going to stop now. Thank's for letting us know!
-
I seem to recall this same "battle" being fought in the early 70's.
-
You fools they dont want you to take your vitamins so you get sick more often and buy medicines from the pharmaceutical companies..
These scientists are usualy funded by them, and if they produce research that shows differently to what their sponsors want, they stop the funding..
Dont buy into the anti vitamin bs, before you know it you will need a prescription to buy them, they already tried doing this in Australia..
Dont take everything authorative figures say as gosple.
-
milk?
you know that in the majority of humans lactase levels decline after breastfeeding begins which indicates that milk is to be weened off.Many ethnicities lack enough lactase to take care of consumption, i doubt milk is a solid choice here.
No offense but you have no clue what you're talking about. Raw milk has naturally occurring lactase. Those who are lactose intolerant cannot handle pasteurized dairy products but have no problems digesting raw dairy products, as nature intended. I suggest you read up on Weston A. Price and his study of indigenous people all over the world during the 1930's. One tribe he studied in particular were the Masai in Africa. They lived off blood and milk basically. Suffered none of the chronic diseases that affect westerners such as arthritis, heart disease, cancer etc. Many people have allergies to shellfish, peanuts, eggs etc. Doesn't mean they are bad foods that others shouldn't embrace. I'd say raw milk and raw eggs are two of the most healthiest foods humans can consume. You can live off of raw milk and eggs. Try living off vegetables and see how long you live.
-
You fools they dont want you to take your vitamins so you get sick more often and buy medicines from the pharmaceutical companies..
These scientists are usualy funded by them, and if they produce research that shows differently to what their sponsors want, they stop the funding..
Dont buy into the anti vitamin bs, before you know it you will need a prescription to buy them, they already tried doing this in Australia..
Dont take everything authorative figures say as gosple.
good thesis there but now you have to prove it :D
-
vit c cures heart disease - theres a patent on its use for this treatment, so no company will fund research to prove it.
also vitamins can not be patented, so there is no profit in corporations finding out if a vitamin cures a disease, as they cannot get exclusive rights to sell it.
vitamin b17 cures cancer.
read upon this and do not be fooled by big pharma.
-
vit c cures heart disease - theres a patent on its use for this treatment, so no company will fund research to prove it.
also vitamins can not be patented, so there is no profit in corporations finding out if a vitamin cures a disease, as they cannot get exclusive rights to sell it.
vitamin b17 cures cancer.
read upon this and do not be fooled by big pharma.
The science surrounding B17 is very shoddy. Apricot kernels etc. There is a book on this subject called a World Without Cancer or something like that. I have an open mind but what little research I've done on B17 seems like quakery.
-
A Johns Hopkins School of Medicine review of 19 vitamin E clinical trials of more than 135,000 people showed high doses of vitamin E (greater than 400 IUs) increased a person’s risk for dying during the study period by 4 percent. Taking vitamin E with other vitamins and minerals resulted in a 6 percent higher risk of dying.
I love stuff like that. How do you measure a person's risk for dying?? (and by how many percent it's increased lol ???) Did they all die during the study?
-
The science surrounding B17 is very shoddy. Apricot kernels etc. There is a book on this subject called a World Without Cancer or something like that. I have an open mind but what little research I've done on B17 seems like quakery.
you have to look beyond the lies.
how many billions would be lost if a cure for cancer was found? and they could not patent it because the cure was a simple vitamin ;)
there is too much cash at stake to allow a cure to be found.
-
mostly old people die of cancer
the key here is to never get old, then you avoid cancer
-
No offense but you have no clue what you're talking about. Raw milk has naturally occurring lactase. Those who are lactose intolerant cannot handle pasteurized dairy products but have no problems digesting raw dairy products, as nature intended. I suggest you read up on Weston A. Price and his study of indigenous people all over the world during the 1930's. One tribe he studied in particular were the Masai in Africa. They lived off blood and milk basically. Suffered none of the chronic diseases that affect westerners such as arthritis, heart disease, cancer etc. Many people have allergies to shellfish, peanuts, eggs etc. Doesn't mean they are bad foods that others shouldn't embrace. I'd say raw milk and raw eggs are two of the most healthiest foods humans can consume. You can live off of raw milk and eggs. Try living off vegetables and see how long you live.
no offense taken, if im wrong i will admit no big deal. Post the study you are referring to if you would. I have some other arguments but im busy right now, ill get back to you.
-
no offense taken, if im wrong i will admit no big deal. Post the study you are referring to if you would. I have some other arguments but im busy right now, ill get back to you.
you'll be waiting quite a while for lovemusclemcmannus to post a study.
-
You fools they dont want you to take your vitamins so you get sick more often and buy medicines from the pharmaceutical companies..
These scientists are usualy funded by them, and if they produce research that shows differently to what their sponsors want, they stop the funding..
Dont buy into the anti vitamin bs, before you know it you will need a prescription to buy them, they already tried doing this in Australia..
Dont take everything authorative figures say as gosple.
This is one of the points I brought up to "Necrosis" some time ago regarding his claim that vitamin E increases the risk of death. These studies are in large part funded by research institutes that receive large sums of funding from pharmaceutical corporations, making their studies immediately suspect. I like to "round" data before making claims. That is, analyse the result of many studies done over many year in different parts of the World on a subject and then deduce conclusions based on trends that are observable on most studies.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
no offense taken, if im wrong i will admit no big deal. Post the study you are referring to if you would. I have some other arguments but im busy right now, ill get back to you.
It's not a study it's a book called Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. Plus you can check out www.westonaprice.org which has a host of research on Weston Price. I've been drinking raw milk for 3 years. I personally know the benefits of it. Also UC Davis is currently doing lots of research and has done lots of research on the health benefits of raw milk.
-
It's not a study it's a book called Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. Plus you can check out www.westonaprice.org which has a host of research on Weston Price. I've been drinking raw milk for 3 years. I personally know the benefits of it. Also UC Davis is currently doing lots of research and has done lots of research on the health benefits of raw milk.
ok, books are not adequete material for this discussion, many biases,opinions etc can be made and things others may not agree with can be written, books are not relevant sources.
Post some of UC Davises work on raw milk for me if you would, he has lots apparently. Thanks dude.
-
This is one of the points I brought up to "Necrosis" some time ago regarding his claim that vitamin E increases the risk of death. These studies are in large part funded by research institutes that receive large sums of funding from pharmaceutical corporations, making their studies immediately suspect. I like to "round" data before making claims. That is, analyse the result of many studies done over many year in different parts of the World on a subject and then deduce conclusions based on trends that are observable on most studies.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
I take mixed tocopherol/tocotrienol product everyday, no one should take just alpha tocopherol. I was making a point about how you claimed fish oils are bad because of redox, so i posted a study showing detrimental effects of vitamine e.
You said that you did a study on yourself.
I agree with you about vitamine e.
-
Well M squared, I guess you'll just have to watch the video then.
if it was true then why is scurvy cured? pellegra? beri beri?
bit of a far fetched claim.
-
if it was true then why is scurvy cured? pellegra? beri beri?
bit of a far fetched claim.
did you watch them all ?
scurvy was simply a vitamin deficiency, the claim is that cancer is also - a vitamin b17 deficiency.
i don't think its far fetched - especially when people have been cured by it.
-
did you watch them all ?
scurvy was simply a vitamin deficiency, the claim is that cancer is also - a vitamin b17 deficiency.
i don't think its far fetched - especially when people have been cured by it.
the video is rhetoric, i dont just documentaries nor do i get my medical information from them. Post actual research and i would change my opinion. However malignant cancers can invade every tissue of the body and thus make the symptoms of the particular cancer different. This is not the case with deficiency states for the most part, as they have well defined mechanisms. Neoplasms share irregular cell shape, mitotic division,malignancy other then that they are pretty diverse.
-
1: Cancer. 1981 Mar 1;47(5 Suppl):1226-40.Links
Vitamins and cancer prevention: issues and dilemmas.Young VR, Newberne PM.
Vitamins are a class of organic compounds that are components of an adequate diet. They or their derivatives function as coenzymes, cellular antioxidants, and/or regulators of gene expression. Fourteen vitamins are recognized in human nutrition (Vitamins A, D, E, K, B1, B2, B6, B12, C, niacin, folacin, pantothenic acid, biotin, choline), with deficiencies or excesses in intake leading to changes in protein, nucleic acid, carbohydrates, fat and/or mineral metabolism. Thus, the integrity of physiological systems, including those associated with detoxification, cellular repair, immune processes, and neural and endocrine function, depends upon the nutritional and vitamin status of the host. For these reasons, it may be anticipated that the adequacy of the vitamin supply to cells and tissues would affect the development, progress, and outcome of cancers. In this review, the definition and functions of and requirements and recommended allowance for vitamins are discussed briefly before exploring the evidence, largely from studies in experimental animals, that indicates the nature of the link between vitamins and cancer. Although evidence based on studies in animal systems reveals that vitamin intake and status can modulate the outcome of experimental carcinogenesis, the findings are often conflicting and difficult to interpret. Furthermore, it is not yet possible to develop a suitable prediction of the role of the individual vitamins in tumor development. The significance of these observations for human nutrition and cancer prevention, particularly in reference to ascorbic acid (vitamin C), vitamin E, and B-complex vitamins is considered. Vitamin A and retinoid compounds are discussed elsewhere in the symposium. The many popular misconceptions and unsound advice concerning vitamins and health, including "fake" vitamins-pangamic acid ("vitamin B15") and laetrile ("vitamin B17")-are also discussed. On the basis of current evidence, it would be inappropriate to recommend either substantial changes in habitual vitamin intakes, as provided by an adequate, well-balanced diet, or promotion of megavitamin intakes, as a means of reducing risk from cancers in the human population. However, a prudent approach toward diet and food habits, as a means of better optimizing the health consequences of our complex lifestyle is to be recommended.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdalin
"Amygdalin (from Greek: ἀμυγδάλη amygdálē “almond”), C20H27NO11, is a glycoside initially isolated from the seeds of the tree Prunus dulcis, also known as bitter almonds, by Pierre-Jean Robiquet[1] and A. F. Boutron-Charlard in 1803, and subsequently investigated by Liebig and Wöhler in 1830, and others. Several other related species in the genus of Prunus, including apricot (Prunus armeniaca) and black cherry (Prunus serotina),[2] also contain amygdalin. It was promoted as a cancer cure by Ernst T. Krebs under the name "Vitamin B17", but studies have found it to be ineffective.
Amygdalin contains 6% cyanide by weight. The enzyme, beta-glucosidase, required for release of the cyanide from the amygdalin molecule, is present in human small intestine and in a variety of common foods which leads to an unpredictable and potentially lethal toxicity when amygdalin or Laetrile is taken orally.[7][8]
2006 Cochrane review of the evidence concluded that there is no sound evidence that laetrile is an effective cancer treatment[9] and that there is considerable doubt about its safety.[9] It has not been approved for this use by the United States' Food and Drug Administration.[6] The U.S. government's National Institutes of Health evaluated the evidence, including case reports and a clinical trial, and concluded that they showed little effect.[10] A 1982 trial of 178 patients found that tumor size had increased in all patients. Minimal side effects were seen except in two patients who consumed bitter almonds and suffered from cyanide poisoning"
cochrane reviews are the pinnacle of research, things aint looking good for this non-vitamin.
perhaps you have some solid evidence? All ears.
-
1: Cancer. 1981 Mar 1;47(5 Suppl):1226-40.Links
Vitamins and cancer prevention: issues and dilemmas.Young VR, Newberne PM.
Vitamins are a class of organic compounds that are components of an adequate diet. They or their derivatives function as coenzymes, cellular antioxidants, and/or regulators of gene expression. Fourteen vitamins are recognized in human nutrition (Vitamins A, D, E, K, B1, B2, B6, B12, C, niacin, folacin, pantothenic acid, biotin, choline), with deficiencies or excesses in intake leading to changes in protein, nucleic acid, carbohydrates, fat and/or mineral metabolism. Thus, the integrity of physiological systems, including those associated with detoxification, cellular repair, immune processes, and neural and endocrine function, depends upon the nutritional and vitamin status of the host. For these reasons, it may be anticipated that the adequacy of the vitamin supply to cells and tissues would affect the development, progress, and outcome of cancers. In this review, the definition and functions of and requirements and recommended allowance for vitamins are discussed briefly before exploring the evidence, largely from studies in experimental animals, that indicates the nature of the link between vitamins and cancer. Although evidence based on studies in animal systems reveals that vitamin intake and status can modulate the outcome of experimental carcinogenesis, the findings are often conflicting and difficult to interpret. Furthermore, it is not yet possible to develop a suitable prediction of the role of the individual vitamins in tumor development. The significance of these observations for human nutrition and cancer prevention, particularly in reference to ascorbic acid (vitamin C), vitamin E, and B-complex vitamins is considered. Vitamin A and retinoid compounds are discussed elsewhere in the symposium. The many popular misconceptions and unsound advice concerning vitamins and health, including "fake" vitamins-pangamic acid ("vitamin B15") and laetrile ("vitamin B17")-are also discussed. On the basis of current evidence, it would be inappropriate to recommend either substantial changes in habitual vitamin intakes, as provided by an adequate, well-balanced diet, or promotion of megavitamin intakes, as a means of reducing risk from cancers in the human population. However, a prudent approach toward diet and food habits, as a means of better optimizing the health consequences of our complex lifestyle is to be recommended.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdalin
"Amygdalin (from Greek: ἀμυγδάλη amygdálē “almond”), C20H27NO11, is a glycoside initially isolated from the seeds of the tree Prunus dulcis, also known as bitter almonds, by Pierre-Jean Robiquet[1] and A. F. Boutron-Charlard in 1803, and subsequently investigated by Liebig and Wöhler in 1830, and others. Several other related species in the genus of Prunus, including apricot (Prunus armeniaca) and black cherry (Prunus serotina),[2] also contain amygdalin. It was promoted as a cancer cure by Ernst T. Krebs under the name "Vitamin B17", but studies have found it to be ineffective.
Amygdalin contains 6% cyanide by weight. The enzyme, beta-glucosidase, required for release of the cyanide from the amygdalin molecule, is present in human small intestine and in a variety of common foods which leads to an unpredictable and potentially lethal toxicity when amygdalin or Laetrile is taken orally.[7][8]
2006 Cochrane review of the evidence concluded that there is no sound evidence that laetrile is an effective cancer treatment[9] and that there is considerable doubt about its safety.[9] It has not been approved for this use by the United States' Food and Drug Administration.[6] The U.S. government's National Institutes of Health evaluated the evidence, including case reports and a clinical trial, and concluded that they showed little effect.[10] A 1982 trial of 178 patients found that tumor size had increased in all patients. Minimal side effects were seen except in two patients who consumed bitter almonds and suffered from cyanide poisoning"
cochrane reviews are the pinnacle of research, things aint looking good for this non-vitamin.
perhaps you have some solid evidence? All ears.
that documentry discusses studies done, and talks to some of the people who have ben cured.
necrosis you will not get the peer reviewed study you are after in any medical journal, as any medical establishment recomending their patients take b17 to cure cancer would have their licence revoked immediately.
bigpharma would never allow a free natural cure to be found/announced for an multibillion dollar fund generating disease like cancer. hey would lose far too much from it.
the fda is controlled by big pharma as is the NIH, so you cannot take their recommendations as unbias.
At worse you take a harmless vitamin - at best it cures cancer - whats the problem with this ?
-
that documentry discusses studies done, and talks to some of the people who have ben cured.
necrosis you will not get the peer reviewed study you are after in any medical journal, as any medical establishment recomending their patients take b17 to cure cancer would have their licence revoked immediately.
bigpharma would never allow a free natural cure to be found/announced for an multibillion dollar fund generating disease like cancer. hey would lose far too much from it.
the fda is controlled by big pharma as is the NIH, so you cannot take their recommendations as unbias.
At worse you take a harmless vitamin - at best it cures cancer - whats the problem with this ?
YES!
-
Thanks for helping me out, I gave up on this guy. He'll still take the Chemo though I bet, poor brainwashed bastard.
i just don't understand the negativity toward a natural vitamin ???
people with cancer can still have chemo, etc but there would be no harm taking the vitamin too.
you have to ask why doctors/the medical establishment are all so against their patients taking a harmless substance - even suggesting someone takes this, would get their licence revoked. To me this speaks volumes.
-
i just don't understand the negativity toward a natural vitamin ???
people with cancer can still have chemo, etc but there would be no harm taking the vitamin too.
you have to ask why doctors/the medical establishment are all so against their patients taking a harmless substance - even suggesting someone takes this, would get their licence revoked. To me this speaks volumes.
research has been done on the compound, it is not a vitamin. It has proven to be ineffective and possibly dangerous. There are a plethora of natural alternatives and supplements with have peer reviewed research stating their efficacy.
If a doctor was to prescribe this unproven potentially dangerous treatment for someone in jepordy of losing their life i would consider him a quack and irresponsible. They have to prescribe the current proven treatments, this protects the public from renegade doctors who can do as they please.
It meets no criteria for a vitamin, it was hauled out of russia and the states due to ineffectiveness and possible side effects. Who has been cured by this miracle compound? you are suggesting a huge conspiracy which makes me wonder dude. Do you think doctors would hide a cure to something that 1 in 3 people die from? do you think that they dont have family members they wish to cure and heal? do you think that people in pharmacy if dying from cancer would hide this truth.
-
'Cause of vaccines, younger people are getting cancer more, 'cause there's cancer cells in there (& tons of mercury).
i will start deleting unintelligent drivel like this in the future. Please, this is a board where potential health altering information can be shared, post evidence for your claims and i have no problem.
-
research has been done on the compound, it is not a vitamin. It has proven to be ineffective and possibly dangerous. There are a plethora of natural alternatives and supplements with have peer reviewed research stating their efficacy.
If a doctor was to prescribe this unproven potentially dangerous treatment for someone in jepordy of losing their life i would consider him a quack and irresponsible. They have to prescribe the current proven treatments, this protects the public from renegade doctors who can do as they please.
It meets no criteria for a vitamin, it was hauled out of russia and the states due to ineffectiveness and possible side effects. Who has been cured by this miracle compound? you are suggesting a huge conspiracy which makes me wonder dude. Do you think doctors would hide a cure to something that 1 in 3 people die from? do you think that they dont have family members they wish to cure and heal? do you think that people in pharmacy if dying from cancer would hide this truth.
no i think doctors would prescribe it if they knew it worked, but are told it doesn't and anyone who does prescribe it will lose their licence.
i also think people in bigpharma would use it, but only the top people know about it. the rest of the plebs know nothing like you and joe average on the street.
watch all the parts of the documentry, it talks about studies that have been done, then make your comments.
also read http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/
-
no i think doctors would prescribe it if they knew it worked, but are told it doesn't and anyone who does prescribe it will lose their licence.
i also think people in bigpharma would use it, but only the top people know about it. the rest of the plebs know nothing like you and joe average on the street.
watch all the parts of the documentry, it talks about studies that have been done, then make your comments.
also read http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/
ok, ill watch the rest of it when i have time, i have seen the first half per se a while ago when i just watched it out of curiosity.
makes me wonder though with these people calling it a vitamin, raises some red flags in my book.
-
ok, ill watch the rest of it when i have time, i have seen the first half per se a while ago when i just watched it out of curiosity.
makes me wonder though with these people calling it a vitamin, raises some red flags in my book.
if it is proved to be a cure for cancer, you could indeed call it a vitamin, as the body needs it. :D