These are from survivor forums

https://www.inspire.com/groups/lung-cancer-survivors/discussion/bitter-almondsvitamin-b17/reply/3968553/

I have been taking between 15 and 20 apricot kernels everyday (when I

remember) now for about 5 months.
I don't know whether the kernels are helping because I am taking so many other
natural therapies as well, but I am confident the kernels are doing no harm, so I'm
going to keep on taking them.
My lastest CT Scan, on March 23, 2013, showed there was no further growth (or
further shrinkage) in any of my Stage 4 lung cancer tumours. Everything is
stable.
My guess is that the single most effective natural treatment for me has been
cannabis along with intravenous Vitamin C @ 75 grams 2x per week.
I've been using (1) Snake Oil drops (5 drops at bedtime); Cannacaps (one
capsule at 9:00 am and one capsule at 3:00 pm); cannabis resin (1 gram at
bedtime) and Holy Annointing Oil to rub on my back and chest every night at
bedtime.
Fred25
Age: 76
Diagnosed with Stage 4 lung cancer in October 2011.

url to reply - https://www.inspire.com/groups/lung-cancersurvivors/discussion/bitter-almonds-vitamin-b17/reply/3968553/

By adoman77

Reply 3968553 In reply to 3967576 by AnnikaH

April 5, 2013 at 9:40 pm

read my post again......GONE ....no sign of LC ...Perfect check-ups

every 3 months.....for last 9 and a half years....
........................
And here is why Apricot kernels are NOT poisonous ..
Apricot seeds main ingredient is Amagdylin .. Amagdylin contains
four substances. Two are glucose; one is benzaldyhide, and one is
cyanide. Yes, cyanide and benzaldyhide are poisons if they are
released or freed as pure molecules and not bound within other
molecular formations. Many foods containing cyanide are safe
because the cyanide remains bound and locked as part of another

molecule and therefore cannot cause harm.

There is even an enzyme in normal cells to catch any free cyanide
molecules and to render them harmless by combining them with
sulfur. That enzyme is rhodanese, which catalyzes the reaction and
binds any free cyanide to sulfur. By binding the cyanide to sulfur, it is
converted to a cyanate which is a neutral substance. Then it is
easily passed through the urine with no harm to the normal cells.
But cancer cells are not normal. They contain an enzyme that other
cells do not share, beta-glucosidase. This enzyme, virtually
exclusive to cancer cells, is considered the "unlocking enzyme" for
amagdylin molecules. It releases both the benzaldyhide and the
cyanide, creating a toxic synergy beyond their uncombined sum.
This is what the cancer cell's beta-glucosidase enzyme does to self
destruct cancer cells.
Amagdylin or laetrile in conjunction with the protective enzymes in
healthy cells and the unlocking enzymes in cancer cells is thus able
to destroy cancer cells without jeopardizing healthy cells.
Chemotherapy, on the other hand, kills a lot of other cells and
diminishes one's immune system while killing an undetermined
amount of cancer cells.
Those cancer cells tend to return elsewhere because the patient's
general health was reduced from the pervasive chemo toxins. The
cancer industry has declared the bench mark for curing cancer as
being cancer free for 5 years. It's estimated that of those who
undergo the AMA big three for curing cancer, surgery, radiation, and

chemotherapy, no more than 3% make the 5 year cancer free mark.

Besides the treatments' debilitating effects, they are much more
expensive!
But for someone with cancer, it takes a considerable amount of daily
B17 consumption to enable the amagdylin to reach the cancer cells
with beta-glucosidase. That's because some of the amagdylin
molecules will be neutralized by the normal cells containing
rhodanese.
Many practitioners who use laetrile have an 85% cure rate among
cancer victims who did not undergo much of the standard cut, burn,
and poison that is main-stream - while the cure rate for those who
come to laetrile therapy as a last resort after all that conventional
medicine could only have a 15% recovery rate.

http://www.chrisbeatcancer.com/b17-laetrile-alternative-cancertreatment-suppressed-50-years/

cure by medical grade cannabis oil thc and cbd 1:1 ratio-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT8ryvvdSto

cures covered by industry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAMYAoiCSsI

cannabis thc and cbd

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQwwGPiyW9M

B17 from Bitter Apricot Kernels is a very effective and proven cure for Cancer but must be used with
the following protocol.
Build to 100 kernels daily. Nausea is the cancer being killed like flies. Take Zinc which is the carrier for
B17 and Vitamin C which kills cancer. Follow a pH diet. Disease cannot flourish in an Alkaline
enviromment. This protocol has cured liver cancer in eight weeks. A negative attitude will not help to
beat this disease.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?
q=cancertutor+b17&oq=cancertutor+b17&aqs=chrome..69i57j0.9008j0j8&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=
93&ie=UTF-8
"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast,
colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use
chemotherapy for these tumors." (Allen Levin, MD, UCSF, The Healing of Cancer, Marcus Books, 1990)
de Effects of Chemotherapy
Consider the following statement from cancer specialist Professor Charles Mathe, who declared:
"If I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment centre. Cancer victims who
live far from such centres have a chance."5.
Walter Last, writing in The Ecologist, reported recently:
"After analysing cancer survival statistics for several decades, Dr Hardin Jones, a professor at the
University of California, concluded: '...patients are as well, or better off, untreated. Jones's disturbing
assessment has never been refuted.'"6.

Or what about this?

"Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumour, with a hopefulness
undiscouraged by almost invariable failure." (Albert Braverman, MD, "Medical Oncology in the 90s",
Lancet 1991, vol. 337, p. 901)
Or this?
"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast,
colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use
chemotherapy for these tumors." (Allen Levin, MD, UCSF, The Healing of Cancer)
Or even this?
"Despite widespread use of chemotherapies, breast cancer mortality has not changed in the last 70
years." (Thomas Dao, MD, New England Journal of Medicine, March 1975, vol. 292, p. 707)
Chemotherapy is an invasive and toxic treatment able supposedly to eliminate cancer cells.
Unfortunately, though, its ferocious chemistry is not able to differentiate between the cancerous cell or
the healthy cell and surrounding healthy tissue. Put simply, chemotherapy is an intravenously
administered poison that kills all living matter. Repeated chemotherapy and repeated radiation
treatments kill the whole body by degrees. The immune system is hit particularly hard by
chemotherapy and often does not recuperate enough to protect adequately against common illnesses,
which can then lead to death.
Some 67 per cent of people who die during cancer treatment do so through opportunistic infections
arising as a direct result of the immune system failing because of the aggressive and toxic nature of
the drugs.7 What is this, if not death by doctoring? And the side effects from both chemotherapy and
radiation itself are extensive. They can include dizziness, skin discolouration, sensory loss,
audio/visual impairment, nausea, diarrhoea, loss of hair, loss of appetite leading to malnutrition, loss
of sex drive, loss of white blood cells, permanent organ damage, organ failure, internal bleeding,
tissue loss and cardiovascular leakage (artery deterioration), to name but a few.
Two years ago, Hazel was diagnosed with breast cancer. She described her chemotherapy as the worst
experience of her life:
"This highly toxic fluid was being injected into my veins. The nurse administering it was wearing
protective gloves because it would burn her skin if just a tiny drip came into contact with it. I couldn't
help asking myself, 'If such precautions were needed to be taken on the outside, what is it doing to
me on the inside?'
"When we add laetrile to a cancer culture under the microscope," said Dr Burk, "providing the enzyme
glucosidase also is present, we can see the cancer cells dying off like flies."20

(Glucosidase is the enzyme heavily present in cancerous cells, which triggers the unique cancerdestroying mechanism found in vitamin B17. An excellent clinical analysis of this mechanism is found
in B17 Metabolic Therapy - In the Prevention and Control of Cancer, a concise history of the research
into this vitamin, including many clinical assessments.21)
Dr Burk also stated that evidence for laetrile's efficacy had been noted in at least five independent
institutions in three widely separated countries of the world.
Royal Rife Cures are available at www.ngcenergyhealing.com

Global spending on conventional cancer running into the hundreds of billions annually, a naturally
occurring cancer cure of any description is an unwanted intruder.
Here is Dr Moss, again from the April 1994 Laura Lee interview, this time on the money involved in
conventional cancer:
Moss: "About 630,000 people die every year of cancer in the US, and it really is an epidemic disease.
We have got a tremendous industry. Every one of those people who is getting cancer and dying of it is
going to be treated, and these treatments are extremely expensive. Chemo is [costed at] tens of
thousands, sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars. A bone marrow transplant, which is basically
another way of giving chemotherapy, or radiation, can run to about $150,000 per person, and is
almost never effective. It kills about 25 per cent of the patients."
Lee: "Why carry on doing it?"
Moss: "Because of the money, which is tremendous."29
When we understand the amounts of money involved, we can begin to understand the in-house desire
to sustain a "fact-creating" process in support of conventional treatment. Conventional cancer
treatment and cancer research are a licence to print money. Most definitely, conventional interested
parties and institutions have colluded in a shameful anti-vitamin B17 "fact-creating" process, which in
turn has surely led to the early and unnecessary deaths of thousands upon thousands of people.
As for John Diamond's dismissal of vitamin B17, he didn't write his comments on B17 as an intentional
slur. He wasn't the forked tongue in this chain of events. He desperately wanted to live. His single
paragraph read by thousands was just another example of the damaging knock-on effect of merchantspeak. Merchant-speak on vitamin B17 metabolic therapy has exacted a grave injustice upon this
treatment, and subsequently upon all who have been persuaded to think likewise.

Let's now look at some testimonies from those who have not been persuaded by the negative
propaganda.
Phillip
Phillip is 64. In April 2001, he was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer. The oncologist showed him
the X-rays that confirmed the dreaded "shadows". He was told to go home, enjoy his life as best he
could and put his affairs in order. A week later, in a chance conversation at work, Phillip was told about
vitamin B17. Phillip immediately began taking a combination of vitamin B17 and vitamin C. Four
months later, Phillip returned to hospital for a check-up, where a new set of X-rays was taken. The
shadows had completely disappeared. Says Phillip:"I know what I saw, and the doctor couldn't explain
it. I'm continuing with my vitamin B17 regime and eating about 10 kernels a day."30
Phillip now pays great attention to his diet and believes that what we put into our bodies can have a
dramatic effect medicinally.