several old studies says no, more recent studies says yes. Robert Bell in 1870 used raw salad to increase amygdalin in cancer patients and used saliva to detect the presence. Several sources say amygdaline converts to cyanide in an acidic enviroment and when gets in contact with acid lactic of cancer masses convert to cyanide and kill them (sort of selective killing). To be absorbed as amygdaline and avoid convertion into cyanide in the gut it should be taken from food rather administered directly. There are some roman texts about incresing lifespan of cancer patients with regular intake of 2-3 bitter almonds (rich on amygdaline) a day. Anyone has experience on it? Are research on amygdaline extensive and satisfactory? What is your opinion?
Amygdalin has been promoted as alternative or complementary or ”natural“ therapy for many years. The toxicity is well documented, it is a cyanogen glycoside, i.e. will release cyanide which will inhibit cytochrome-C-oxidase (blocking cell respiration). Clinical evidence for efficacy in tumor therapy is scare to non-existent, case reports are of limited value, and there are no positive clinical trials that would live up to even low evidence requirements. A methodological acceptable clinical study by the NCI was clearly negative (1). There have been theories that a different enzyme pattern in neoplastic tissue might be the basis for a selective or increased effect on tumors; but experimental studies demonstrated the fallacy of these theories long ago (2-5). Without convincing new evidence (clinical or experimental) I guess the scientific case is closed.
1. Moertel CG et al.: A clinical trial of amygdalin (Laetrile) in the treatment of human cancer. N Engl J of Med. 1982;306:201-206
2. Newmark J et al.: Amygdalin (Lae - trile) and prunasin beta-glucosidases: distribution in germ-free rat and in human tumor tissue. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981;78(10):6513-6516
3. Gal EM et al.: Studies on the biological action of malononitriles, II: distribution of rhodanese (transul - furase) in the tissues of normal and tumor-bearing animals and the effect of malononitriles thereon. Cancer Res. 1952;2:574-579
4. Conchie J et al.: Mammalian glycosidases: distribution in the body. Biochem J.1959;71(2):318-325
5. Wodinsky I et al.: Antitumor activity of amygdalin MF (NSC-15780) as a single agent and with beta-glucosi - dase (NSC-128056) on a spectrum of transplantable rodent tumors. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1975;59(5):93
@Harald Enzmann, thank you very much for your response.
What about these recent researchs below, are they methodologically and statistically flawed?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233383171_Amygdalin_induces_apoptosis_in_human_cervical_cancer_cell_line_HeLa_cells
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301251835_Tripterygium_wilfordii_Amygdalin_and_Graviola_Induce_cell_death_in_Cancer_Cells_but_not_Normal_Cell
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282001556_Inhibition_of_cell_growth_and_down-regulation_of_telomerase_activity_by_amygdalin_in_human_cancer_cell_lines
Thank you
Dear Vincenzo
I do not want to discourage anyone from following and scientific idea; but I am a sceptic here – much work has been spent on amygdaline in the last 50 (!) years, and the results…
There is also some information on the FDA homepage which is a useful summary
http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/cam/patient/laetrile-pdq
More specific to the studies you metioned:
Moon et al compared cancer cells to fibroblasts. Fibroblasts are very tough cells. That cancer cells are more sensitive than fibroblasts is not very impressive. In my view not enough to outweigh the negative in vivo studies (animals) or trials we have seen before.
Patrikios et al: The abstract gives little information; they do not say what the “normal non-transformed cells” were – posssibly fibrobalst, too?
Yu Chen et al describe in their figures effects beginning at 5mg/ml – or may be at 1.25mg/ml. This is way beyond anything we may consider promising – that equals on or more gram per liter! Consider what that means for a 70 kg person. In addition, there is an impressive collection of reports on oral amygdalin poisonings starting at about 1 g per person, some lethal. Although cyanide seems less problematic when given intravenously, I still think the use of that kind of high concentrations is not convincing.
Kind regards
Harald
Role of amygdalin (laetrile or vitamin B17) in cancer treatment is not yet scientifically proven. Please go through the following RG links.
Article Laetrile treatment for cancer
Article Laetrile for cancer: A systematic review of the clinical evidence
Article Vitamin B17 and its Proposed Application in Treating Cancer
Article Vitamin-B 17: An Alternative Treatment of Cancer-A Myth or Truth
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Oncology
- Cancer Research