Can taking Vitamin B17 prevent cancer?

I have recently been told that VItamin B17 can prevent cancer and will stop the growth of cancerous tumors in those people who do have cancer.

3 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    "Amygdalin (from Greek: ἀμυγδάλη, almond), C20H27NO11,

    also known as laetrile ( amygdalin or vitamin B17) is a glycoside isolated from bitter almonds by H. E. Robiquet and A. F. Boutron-Charlard in 1830, and subsequently investigated by Liebig and Wöhler, and others. Some sources claim Ernst T. Krebs was the discoverer of the substance, and Krebs is generally credited with popularizing it as a purported cancer cure and as "Vitamin B17.Though it is sometimes sold as "Vitamin B17", it is not a vitamin, as no disease is associated with a dietary deficiency of Laetrile (while some people believe that cancer is related to such a lack of "B17," (and thus, that it can be used as cancer treatment) it has not been firmly established as medical fact).

    "In July 1980, the NCI undertook clinical trials of 178 cancer patients who received Laetrile, vitamins and enzymes at the Mayo Clinic and three other prominent cancer centers. The study included patients for whom no other treatment had been effective or for whom no proven treatment was known. All patients had tumor masses that could easily be measured, but most of the patients were in good physical condition. Since Laetrile proponents were unable to agree on the formula or testing protocol for Laetrile, NCI decided to use a preparation that corresponded to the substance distributed by the major Mexican supplier, American Biologics. The preparation was supplied by the NCI Pharmaceutical Resources Branch and verified by a variety of tests. The dosage of Laetrile was based on the published recommendations of Krebs, Jr., and the Bradford Foundation.

    The results of the trial were clear-cut. Not one patient was cured or even stabilized. The median survival rate was 4.8 months from the start of therapy, and in those still alive after seven months, tumor size had increased. This was the expected result for patients receiving no treatment at all. In addition, several patients experienced symptoms of cyanide toxicity or had blood levels of cyanide approaching the lethal range [1]. An accompanying editorial concluded:

    Laetrile has had its day in court. The evidence, beyond reasonable doubt, is that it doesn't benefit patients with advanced cancer, and there is no reason to believe that it would be any more effective in the earlier stages of the disease . . . The time has come to close the books. [2]"

    Source(s): [1]Moertel C and others. A clinical trial of amygdalin (Laetrile) in the treatment of human cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 306:201-206, 1982. [2]Relman A. Closing the books on Laetrile. New England Journal of Medicine 306:236, 1982.
  • Panda
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago


    The simple reason is that if it worked than all people would be using it.

    If a patient with cancer does not get a clear response within 2 or 3 months when using any type of treatment . . than it probably does not work. This is always exceedingly clear with advanced cancer patients, if a product is going to work it should do so within a month or two beyond that it is useless. With chemotherapy there is never any question within the second cycle whether the product works. With alternatives it takes ages to establish its usefulness. The fact that laetrile is still questioned after all these years indicates that if any benefit exists at all it is so minor as to be ineffective.

    The answer is . . there is no easy cure for cancer . . if there was . . you couldn't stop people from taking it . . they would flock to it.

    Source(s): Experience and extensive cancer research searching for treatment for sons rare abdominal sarcoma.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Forget so called vitamen 17. It is a crock

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.