World Without Cancer by G. Edward Griffin

It's a fairly simple premise to understand, and perhaps that's part of why people like it so much. But it raises serious questions just as soon as it's been stated: namely, if apricot seeds really do contain this miracle cure for cancer, why isn't it all over the front page news? Why have we not yet cured cancer? This book presents its own answer, which will not come as a surprise to anyone who has followed the author's work for any period of time: big government and big pharmaceutical companies are conspiring to keep any "natural" cure suppressed because it cuts into their profit margins.

I will confess that when I first heard about Laetrille, I was, for a short period of time, convinced of its merits. This was some years ago, prior to my education on alternative medicine. It was also prior to reading World Without Cancer, because even with no skepticism of alternative medicine per se, the reader is left with a feeling that Griffin has simply tried too hard to make his case, and in so doing, has taken it in a direction far from what anyone would consider reasonable. Some of his references for the book are from the National Enquirer for Pete's sake!

Griffin, best known for his book on the Federal Reserve System, The Creature From Jekyll Island (a far superior book, still prone to conspiracy theory, but with many good points besides), means well. Of that I am convinced. I don't think he's just out for money. I think he's just out of his mind. I became convinced of this after having read The Creature From Jekyll Island, when I was seeking out some of his other work to see what it was all about. I discovered such titles as The Discovery of Noah's Ark. Such extreme silliness is not the product of a sound mind, and I would have to be quite desperate indeed to take medical advice from such a man.

Which brings us back to Laetrille and World Without Cancer. We need to address two key assertions of this book. The first is that apricot seeds are effective against cancer. The second is that there is some conspiracy to suppress cancer cures.

Laetrille is the trade name for laevo-mandelonitrile-beta-glucuronoside, a substance originally synthesized and patented by Ernst T. Krebs, Jr. It is similar in substance to amygdalin, which is found naturally in various seeds, notably apricot seeds. When it was first marketed for cancer, it was claimed to be a cure. Later, the claims were modified, and it was claimed to "control" cancer (in other words, to slow down the spread of cancer). Later still, it was marketed as a preventative. Which of these claims is actually true? None of them. Though no properly controlled clinical trials have been conducted, preclinical trials and other limited studies have found it to be worthless against cancer.

Side effects of Laetrille, furthermore, resemble the symptoms of cyanide poisoning. Since the substance is banned in the United States, it is sometimes smuggled from Mexico. However, quality and purity of such specimens has varied widely, and some samples have been found to have contained bacteria.

One of the claims presented in this book is that the people of Hunza live extremely long lives and never get cancer, largely due to their diet, which is rich in apricots and their seeds. When explaining to someone that Laetrille doesn't work, I was asked, "then why don't the people of Hunza get cancer?" This was not the right question. The correct question would have been, "do the people of Hunza get cancer?" And the answer, of course, is that they do. Their extreme longevity is also a myth. Human longevity is largely the product of modern medical science, which Laetrille proponents are opposed to.

You should also not be fooled by the title "Vitamin B-17." This is a title used because people feel that vitamins are substances that can be trusted--an assumption that is not entirely true in any case, but far worse in this case, because there is no such vitamin! There are very strict criteria that determine what is or is not a vitamin. This substance does not meet those criteria.

It is true that we don't yet have a cure for cancer, but we do have some effective treatments. If cancer is detected early enough, surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy may be able to defeat it. However, Laetrille advocates often describe these procedures as "slicing, cooking, and drugging" the patients. Griffin himself uses similar terminology when discussing medical science.

And what of the claims that there is some conspiracy to suppress cancer cures? They're bullshit, too. Big government is never to be trusted. I'm the first to agree with that. However, I have seen no compelling evidence to suggest that they're in the business of suppressing cures for any diseases. The closest thing they do to "suppressing" any form of treatment is delaying its release until it can be sufficiently tested. A good intention, and a good idea, although I do think it likely that the bloated bureaucracy may result in delays longer than otherwise necessary. But even still, that's a far cry from claiming that there is a conspiracy to keep people sick.

That's really the answer to the whole thing. No one wants to get sick, and that includes politicians and businessmen. They are not going to suppress a cure that could help themselves or their families, even if they had an interest in suppressing it otherwise (which is untrue anyway).

When you get right down to it, Griffin's claim is that the medical industry makes more money on cancer research than they would on a natural cancer cure, since they're unable to patent naturally occurring substances. But this is absolutely ridiculous. The medical industry is bogged down with too many things to research and too many patients to treat. Even if a natural cure would cut into their research funding related to a particular disease, it is absolutely ludicrous to think that they would suppress that cure. They would be thankful for the discovery, so that they could continue on with their research in other areas, with no substantial loss to their paychecks.

Structurally, the book is well written. Its case is presented in a proper and professional manner. Unfortunately, its case is absolute bullshit, and dangerous because it diverts attention away from legitimate cancer research.

1 out of 5.

Get your copy here
Author's website

Back

Home • Contact