Foods High In Vitamin K - Apricot Kernels, Cancer and Vitamin B17
The content is nIce quality and helpful content, WhIch is new is that you never knew before that I know is that I even have discovered. Prior to the distInctIve. it is currently close to enter a destination Apricot Kernels, Cancer and Vitamin B17. And the content associated with Foods High In Vitamin K.WARNING Please read this before.It's good to bring this Foods High In Vitamin K to the public. If you prefer me to share together with your friends to read this great article.Some other articles may be duplicate to the web, I'm sorry :(Do you know about - Apricot Kernels, Cancer and Vitamin B17
Foods High In Vitamin K! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends.Over the years there have been a number of mixed messages about apricot kernels, which contain the controversial vitamin B17 (also known as amygdalin), and their effectiveness in both treating cancer and keeping it at bay. Amygdalin is a molecule with four components - two of glucose (sugar), one of benzaldehyde and one of cyanide. It seems that the cyanide component of amygdalin is the one that either has everybody hitching up their skirts and running for the hills, or conversely, seeing for a way to claim it as their own and using it as a inherent cancer cure. It would appear that when the communal eats apricot kernels, with the unavoidable cyanide component, it may be very dangerous, but when scientists modify the cyanide component, and call it a treatment, it may be quite safe. Confusing isn't it?
What I said. It isn't the final outcome that the true about Foods High In Vitamin K. You see this article for info on a person want to know is Foods High In Vitamin K.How is Apricot Kernels, Cancer and Vitamin B17
We had a good read. For the benefit of yourself. Be sure to read to the end. I want you to get good knowledge from Foods High In Vitamin K.On the 7th September 2000, 'The Independent' told us that scientists at Imperial College London had found that the 'magic bullet of cyanide could kill cancer cells'. Apparently, a Dr Deonarain from Imperial College stated that for the first time they had been able to show that they could kill cancer cells using a 'prodrug activation approach' (his words, not mine). The paper described the 'magic bullet' as a cyanide cocktail derived from the cassava plant. Could this be because, along with apricot kernels, the cassava plant also contains B17 (amygdalin)?
However, before we unhitch our skirts and return from the hills we need to know about the 'Fatal dangers of alternative cancer cures on the web' as reported in 'The Sunday Times' (3rd August 2004). It seems that 'thousands of cancer patients are risking their condition by following the advice of alternative therapy websites promoting bogus cures'. Edzard Ernst, who is apparently the country's only professor of complementary rehabilitation (clearly a lonely job), called for the government to steer habitancy away from treatments promoted on the great interweb! Shockingly, researchers found that dozens of remedies were being promoted as curing or preventing cancer - together with shark cartilage, coffee enemas, mistletoe and 'apricot extracts' - scary stuff!
The Sunday Times narrative clearly demonstrated the sheer foolishness of taking your condition into your own hands. And as if their dire warning wasn't enough, in 2006 (11th April), the good old Bbc let us know 'Watchdog warns over apricot seeds'. Is there no getting away from apricots! The Bbc reported that the Food Standards division are involved that cyanide can be poisonous in high doses, and that we should consume no more than two bitter apricot kernels per day. In the same report, Cancer investigate Uk (also apparently worried by apricots) warns us that the claims of apricot pips curing cancer are simply not true. They state that 'if simply eating apricot seeds could cure cancer, no one would be more delighted than us'. Possibly they need to get together with Dr Deonarain from Imperial College?
In order to be able to make an informed judgment about what's unmistakably going on we should unmistakably take a look at the science behind the headlines.
The orthodox principles of cancer
As most of us are aware, the approved view of cancer is that the lump/tumour/growth 'is the cancer' and that this needs to be treated with surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or Possibly hormonal or immunotherapy. The idea is that by shrinking the growth, or cutting it out of the body, the cancer will be gone. This is unless the cancer has metastasised (spread to other areas), in this case someone else policy of rehabilitation may be suggested, or the outpatient may be told that the cancer has spread too far and nothing more can be done.
The alternative principles of cancer
The alternative view is that the lump/tumour/growth 'is not the cancer' but is the 'symptom' - a sign that something is going wrong with the natural equilibrium of the body. It is thought that once the basic question is corrected the increase will simply be reabsorbed into the body. Although, it is agreed that if the increase is not reabsorbed and is unsightly, or so large as to interfere with the general functioning of a singular area of the body, then it should be removed by surgery.
The increase is not carefully to be 'pure cancer' - Possibly as exiguous as 20% is unmistakably cancerous, with the remaining 80% being non-cancerous. It is suggested that the cancerous area of the increase is more defiant to radiotherapy than the noncancerous area and therefore less likely to be destroyed. In other words, the increase may be reduced, but the cancer may still remain and can potentially spread.
If we injure ourselves a medical process starts and the affected cells are supplanted with new cells. However, it is thought that cancer is a medical process that has not switched off. In other words, if the body is deficient in something that is needful for homeostasis it may not work effectively and the medical process may just continue going. The result is that the body will start to heal, and then heal again and again until a increase ultimately appears.
There are apparently two lines of defense against this over-healing process and the improvement of cancer. The first involves 'Proteolytic enzymes' (enzymes designed to digest protein), which are produced by the pancreas. The two proteolytic enzymes, trypsin and chymotrypsin, dissolve the protective protein coating around cancer cells and this effectively allows the body's white blood cells in to strike and destroy the cancer cells.
The second line of defense against cancer are substances known as nitrilosides. (It is thought that there are more than 800 foods in the nitriloside family). These nitriloside foods contain vitamin B17 (amygdalin) which is made up of four components - two of glucose (sugar), one of benzaldehyde and one of cyanide. The cancer cell wall has an enzyme called beta-glycosidase (also known as the 'unlocking enzyme'). When B17 (amygdalin) and the unlocking enzyme come into palpate the cancer cell is destroyed. It's thoughprovoking to note that beta-glycosidase is found in cancer cells, and in no other cell in the body (therefore, no other cell can be destroyed). As author G. Edward Griffin points out in his 2005 presentation - 'this is an astonishing mechanism of nature that could not have been accidental'. (See references and links below).
Therefore, in this alternative view of cancer, there is no 'cure' because cancer is in fact all part of the natural physiological processes of the body. It is only when the medical cells are allowed to manufacture unchecked, and our natural lines of defense are down, that it becomes a problem. Some habitancy even feel that we probably manufacture cancer over and over again while our lives, but on most occasions our defense systems simply deal with it - we never know we have had cancer.
This principles seems to be backed up by G. Edward Griffin's thoughprovoking explanation of the cattle on America's mid-west farms. In an interview for Fhv (A Norwegian consumer condition freedom organization) Griffin explains the following: In the mid-west part of the united states farmers found that, in the winter months, their cattle would manufacture cancers in their mouths. However, as the snow melted away and the spring came along, the cattle would start to eat the broad-leafed grasses (rich in B17) and the cancers would simply disappear.
Q & A's
If this principles of cancer is unmistakably true, why doesn't my doctor know about it?
This is a controversial field because there seem to be a number of conflicting or competing interests involved. You might like to watch the second part of G.Edward Griffins explanation of the politics of cancer for a full insight of why this data appears not to have filtered down to doctors and Gp's. You can find this in the references and links section under: The Science and Politics of Cancer 2005, Parts 4 - 7, The politics of cancer therapy: The Pharmaceutical Cartel.
If we have two lines of defense to forestall cancer why would both of these fail?
It seems that our contemporary diets, full of animal fats and dairy products, use up huge amounts of pancreatic enzymes in order to break down this type of food - thereby depleting stocks when they are needed to combat cancer. There are also other reasons, such as having a condition like 'diabetes', where the pancreas is often weakened and therefore less able to produce these needful enzymes. There may also be a hereditary factor where, again, the pancreas is weak and therefore unable to function fully or correctly from birth.
The breakdown of our second line of defense may simply be due to the lack of foods from the nitriloside family. Many of these foods often have a bitter taste and therefore may be avoided by most habitancy - consequently they come to be less ready in approved supermarkets over time. Although, there is also the question of foods such as bread that used to contain 'Millet flour' (rich in B17/amygdalin), but now generally contain the economy 'wheat flour'.
Can cancer be cured?
The approved view would be that scientists are by all means; of course seeing for a 'cure' for cancer. However, the alternative view of cancer seems to show that it is potentially a metabolic disease caused by natural deficiencies and therefore we need to introduce nitriloside foods back into the diet for the rest of our lives and Possibly think about modifying our diets. This is why habitancy who are involved about cancer may be focusing on apricot kernels - a food very high in B17/amygdalin.
Many habitancy who hold the alternative view of cancer would compare it to a metabolic disease such as scurvy. Scurvy was only resolved by taking vitamins C, as most habitancy know. However, vitamins C could not be said to be the 'cure' for scurvy because in order to keep the disease at bay you clearly need to consume foods rich in vitamins C for the rest of your life. A 'cure' implies that you just need to exact the question once and then it is resolved.
Are there other factors complicated in the improvement of cancer?
Yes, it would seem that toxins in our environment and toxins that we take into the body might produce a medical response in the areas that are affected by these toxins. For example, we may damage the lungs if we smoke and this could provoke an over-healing response - which may then not switch off if we are deficient in proteolytic enzymes or nitriloside foodstuffs. This could elucidate why some habitancy who smoke manufacture cancer, whilst others don't.
Are there therapists who can use the alternative advent if someone already has cancer?
Yes, we believe that there are therapists who may be able to help. You could try the 'Gerson withhold Group Uk' or the 'Gerson Institute' - or Possibly the' World Without Cancer' website. (Although, we must stress that 'The Velvet Mind' and 'Andersen Counselling' has no affiliation with any of the websites (or publications) mentioned in this narrative and do not give medical advice of any kind).
Why is it sometimes suggested that habitancy should eat pineapple and papaya melons to keep cancer at bay?
It's our insight that these singular fruits mimic the activity of some of the proteolytic enzymes - thereby dissolving the protein coating of the cancer cell. Papaya melons as a source of the enzyme papain, and pineapple as a source of the enzyme bromelain.
Are there any books I can buy that show me how to contain nitriloside foods in my diet?
Yes, in 1976 a lady called June de Spain (former toxicologist and a pharmacologist for the Federal Food and Drug supervision in the U.S) wrote a book called 'The exiguous cyanide cookbook - yummy recipes rich in vitamin B17'. There was quite a bit of controversy surrounding the writing of this book and her work for the Fda at the time - you might want to hunt 'Google' to learn more.I believe her book is still ready straight through the 'World without Cancer' website or 'Amazon Uk'.
I hope you will get new knowledge about Foods High In Vitamin K. Where you can offer use in your everyday life. And most importantly, your reaction is Foods High In Vitamin K. Read more.. Apricot Kernels, Cancer and Vitamin B17.
Apricot Kernels, Cancer and Vitamin B17 (with Health & Product)
(1 reviews.) You can comment below suggests. Thank you for following us all along. We look forward to creating a good time. Blogger SEOon
There are a great many cultivars of apricots being grown and each of these varieties produce different quantities of amygdalin, from sweet, like almonds, all the way up to extremely bitter – comparable to bitter almonds, which were once readily available. One should be aware of the bitterness of their chosen kernel. Many of the “bitter” kernels being sold are really not very bitter at all. They contain very little amygdalin, and certainly not in therapeutic values. The bitter the better, as they say. Consumption should be varied accordingly. Trial and error through slow and steady consumption is the only real way to determine suitable dosages.
ReplyDeleteI talk more about this on my own blog at http://www.apricot-kernels.blogspot.com.au
There are a great many cultivars of apricots being grown and each of these varieties produce different quantities of amygdalin, from sweet, like almonds, all the way up to extremely bitter – comparable to bitter almonds, which were once readily available. One should be aware of the bitterness of their chosen kernel. Many of the “bitter” kernels being sold are really not very bitter at all. They contain very little amygdalin, and certainly not in therapeutic values. The bitter the better, as they say. Consumption should be varied accordingly. Trial and error through slow and steady consumption is the only real way to determine suitable dosages.
ReplyDeleteI talk more about this on my own blog at http://www.apricot-kernels.blogspot.com.au
nice information.keep it up.
ReplyDeleteVitamin b17 in Cancer