Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
"Hi-Please send 10 of the 1lb bags to equal the 10 lbs. I appreciate it very much. I'm a repeat customer and happy with your service and product. FYI your apricots have helped my aunt that is fighting cancer. thank you!"
Just a quote from one of my customers
- Thread starter the.gladiator1987
- Start date
chris302001
Banned
Dude, you shoulda held out on the Geo. After that order, you prolly could have afforded a Fiesta.
stosstruppe
Well-known member
"Hi-Please send 10 of the 1lb bags to equal the 10 lbs. I appreciate it very much. I'm a repeat customer and happy with your service and product. FYI your apricots have helped my aunt that is fighting cancer. thank you!"
Dude, Jesus...
Its funny how people think cancer cant be stopped, but its a degenerative disease just like any other, like scurvy for example. WIthout vitamin C you will get scurvy. Thousands of sailors were dying horrible deaths because why? 1 fuckin vitamin was missing
chris302001
Banned
You don't bother me bro.
stosstruppe
Well-known member
Absolutely orb! Shoulda went in to the apricot seed business Chris instead of pissing away $100'000s & 8 years of your life on stupid shit like studying medicine!!1
chris302001
Banned
it shows bro. it shows.
Its all about money. The government gets paid to "study" shit for cancer even tho they know theyll never find anything. They just get paid to basically kill people. Chemo has about a 3% success rate. Wow, great
L
lartinos
Guest
Its about making money and nothing else. Think of other things these sick people may need that you can add onto here. It is helping them in a way, but it really is just you making money. They are like any other customer... like people who buy my supplement.
Definitely about making money, but I like the fact that I am helping people and actually improving lives in some. I only sell the seeds/B17 extract, my brothers site has everything from antioxidants to immune support
I'm glad I am a normal 21 y/o kid who lives his life like he should, IM so glad that it "shows"
chris302001
Banned
What will this crazy kid say next?
chris302001
Banned
olololol
calveless wonder
New member
mitch, you better start collecting royalties on that shit
mustang_00
Well-known member
coffee cures cancer! it's a fact! i'm gonna hybrid coffecot seeds and wipe you outta business gladz
DJLegacy2k1
New member
This thread has potential....just sayin
rofl
"Hi-Please send 10 of the 1lb bags to equal the 10 lbs. I appreciate it very much. I'm a repeat customer and happy with your service and product. FYI your apricots have helped my aunt that is fighting cancer. thank you!"
Don't you think that studies would substantiate your claims?
Laetrile / Amygdalin / Vitamin B17 / Sarcarcinase / Nitriloside : BC Cancer Agency
"A clinical trial conducted at the Mayo Clinic and three other prominent cancer centers found no anticancer effect but found significant blood levels of cyanide in some of the patients." (Hafner)
You're a snake oil salesman, preying on the weak. Have some decency and shut it down before you kill someone.
redshirt27se
New member
That's 3% better than Apricot seeds.
mustang_00
Well-known member
CURING cancer is in my 5 year plan. prevention is "cute" though
the caffeinated coffee bean is God's gift to humankind.
mustang_00
Well-known member
i knew i liked you
Yea yea yea Im no snake oil salesman, people come to me i dont even advertise anywhere.
Shit Mitch, had to try really really hard and literally take a couple of deep breaths to not laugh out loud in the office....
lolololololol
Plank - you are one funny orb
Plank - you are one funny orb
PICK3
New member
DJLegacy2k1
New member
All of Glad's threads are golden.
3 were in contention for TOTW last week
Im waiting for people to start dying from cyanide poisoning and start hunting Glad down to lynch him from a tree, then we can see if he's as positive about things then lol
lolololololololol
since each cancer is a mutation of ones own cells, each humans being different, wherein would 1 common cure be effective in every case? my testicular cancer, though testicular cancer, would still be slightly different than yours. yet its the same thing. easy answer to find i guess.
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Apricot Seeds won't save you, no need to look it up. There are 0 studies to say it will do anything other than poison you in high doses My kind of cure!
My kind of cure!
Thats funny, apricot seeds can posion you? Any extreme amount of anything can be bad for you. They were injecting rats with insane amounts of B17. Dumbass, too much iron can lead to a heart attack if you take too much. Too much tylenol, and youll die. Hmm I wonder why we havent banned iron yet? Or tylenol?
Timtim you are right, every cancer cell is different from person to person. But leatriles cyanide only gets unlocked when it reaches a cancer cell. Then it destroys the cancer cell when they come on contact
Timtim you are right, every cancer cell is different from person to person. But leatriles cyanide only gets unlocked when it reaches a cancer cell. Then it destroys the cancer cell when they come on contact
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Except for the fact that there are ZERO medical journals that have ever been officially published that agree with that...Too much water can kill you...we all know this...we just also know Seed Sales are BS lol
I'm going to start telling people to drink a mixture of pineapple and cranberry juice because it unlocks the ability to fly, since there is as much medical information agreeing with that theory as yours.
DJLegacy2k1
New member
I saw the ad...if itz on the interwebz it muzt b tr00!
chris302001
Banned
lol he's a normal 21 yr old kid bro! He knows what he's talking about!
Look up "laetrile case histories"
My mom knew those people, and saw them after the treatment years later. Dr. John Richardson was her husband during all those treatments. He was her husband before she met my dad and had me.
Laetrile Case Histories
DJLegacy2k1
New member
LMAO @ using a scam "book" to get people to pay money for hope a cure so that then a seed salesmen can scam them out of more money.
DJLegacy2k1
New member
History Of Trials:
"At one point, the Krebs' agreed to supply Laetrile for a controlled clinical investigation at Los Angeles County Hospital. But later they said they would do so only if a Laetrile advocate were put in charge—which was not acceptable to hospital authorities. The Commission then evaluated the records of 44 patients treated according to the Krebs' recommendations. Two years had elapsed since the first of these patients had been treated with Laetrile. Nineteen had already died and there was no evidence that Laetrile had helped any of the others."
Wow FREE information says your wrong, go figure.
"At one point, the Krebs' agreed to supply Laetrile for a controlled clinical investigation at Los Angeles County Hospital. But later they said they would do so only if a Laetrile advocate were put in charge—which was not acceptable to hospital authorities. The Commission then evaluated the records of 44 patients treated according to the Krebs' recommendations. Two years had elapsed since the first of these patients had been treated with Laetrile. Nineteen had already died and there was no evidence that Laetrile had helped any of the others."
Wow FREE information says your wrong, go figure.
you're
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Victims in the News
"As Laetrile became newsworthy, several cancer victims treated with it drew widespread media scrutiny. One was Chad Green, who developed acute lymphocytic leukemia at age 2. Although he was rapidly brought into remission with chemotherapy, his parents started him on "metabolic therapy" administered by a Manner Metabolic Physician. When Chad developed signs of cyanide toxicity, Massachusetts authorities had him declared a ward of the court for treatment purposes only. His parents then brought suit to reinstitute "metabolic therapy." When the court ruled against them, they fled with Chad to Mexico, where he was treated by Dr. Contreras. Several months later Chad died in a manner suggestive of cyanide poisoning. Dr. Contreras stated that the boy had died of leukemia, but was a good example of the effectiveness of Laetrile because he had died a pleasant death! Chad's parents stated that he had become very depressed because he missed his grandparents, his friends and his dog.
Joseph Hofbauer was a 9-year-old with Hodgkin's disease. Unlike Chad Green's parents, Joseph's parents never allowed him to receive appropriate treatment but insisted that he receive Laetrile and "metabolic therapy." When New York State authorities attempted to place him in protective custody, his parents filed suit and convinced family court judge Loren Brown to let the parents make the treatment decision. Brown stated that "This court also finds that metabolic therapy has a place in our society, and hopefully, its proponents are on the first rung of a ladder that will rid us of all forms of cancer." The parwents rejected standard treatment, and Joseph died of his disease two years later. Acute lymphocytic leukemia and Hodgkin's disease both have a 95% 5-year survival rate with appropriate chemotherapy.
During 1980, movie star Steve McQueen attracted considerable attention when he was treated with Laetrile at another Mexican clinic under the supervision of William D. Kelley, a dentist who had been delicensed by the State of Texas after several brushes with state and federal law enforcement authorities. Although McQueen gave a glowing report when he began his treatment, he died shortly afterward."
"As Laetrile became newsworthy, several cancer victims treated with it drew widespread media scrutiny. One was Chad Green, who developed acute lymphocytic leukemia at age 2. Although he was rapidly brought into remission with chemotherapy, his parents started him on "metabolic therapy" administered by a Manner Metabolic Physician. When Chad developed signs of cyanide toxicity, Massachusetts authorities had him declared a ward of the court for treatment purposes only. His parents then brought suit to reinstitute "metabolic therapy." When the court ruled against them, they fled with Chad to Mexico, where he was treated by Dr. Contreras. Several months later Chad died in a manner suggestive of cyanide poisoning. Dr. Contreras stated that the boy had died of leukemia, but was a good example of the effectiveness of Laetrile because he had died a pleasant death! Chad's parents stated that he had become very depressed because he missed his grandparents, his friends and his dog.
Joseph Hofbauer was a 9-year-old with Hodgkin's disease. Unlike Chad Green's parents, Joseph's parents never allowed him to receive appropriate treatment but insisted that he receive Laetrile and "metabolic therapy." When New York State authorities attempted to place him in protective custody, his parents filed suit and convinced family court judge Loren Brown to let the parents make the treatment decision. Brown stated that "This court also finds that metabolic therapy has a place in our society, and hopefully, its proponents are on the first rung of a ladder that will rid us of all forms of cancer." The parwents rejected standard treatment, and Joseph died of his disease two years later. Acute lymphocytic leukemia and Hodgkin's disease both have a 95% 5-year survival rate with appropriate chemotherapy.
During 1980, movie star Steve McQueen attracted considerable attention when he was treated with Laetrile at another Mexican clinic under the supervision of William D. Kelley, a dentist who had been delicensed by the State of Texas after several brushes with state and federal law enforcement authorities. Although McQueen gave a glowing report when he began his treatment, he died shortly afterward."
DJLegacy2k1
New member
no no no, i wasnt telling him that he is wrong, I was talking about the "wrong" that he owns...obviously.
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Wow look Glad, these people can have a 5 year plan that includes living if they take the 95% effective CHEMO treatment! Who knew...oh wait, everyone but you...
PICK3
New member
no no no, i wasnt telling him that he is wrong, I was talking about the "wrong" that he owns...obviously.
*wasn't
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Did you just add an ' as a correction? Wow, you have really been working on your "Mo" skills lately eh?
DJLegacy2k1
New member
NCI Studies
"In response to political pressure, the National Cancer Institute did two studies involving Laetrile. The first was a retrospective analysis of patients treated with Laetrile. Letters were written to 385,000 physicians in the United States as well as 70,000 other health professionals requesting case reports of cancer patients who were thought to have benefited from using Laetrile. In addition, the various pro-Laetrile groups were asked to provide information concerning any such patients.
Although it had been estimated that at least 70,000 Americans had used Laetrile—only 93 cases were submitted for evaluation. Twenty-six of these reports lacked adequate documentation to permit evaluation. The remaining 68 cases were "blinded" and submitted to an expert panel for review, along with data from 68 similar patients who had received chemotherapy. That way the panel did not know what treatment patients had received. The panel felt that two of the Laetrile-treated cases demonstrated complete remission of disease, four displayed partial remission, and the remaining 62 cases had exhibited no measurable response. No attempt was made to verify that any of the patients who might have benefited from Laetrile actually existed. The reviewers concluded that "the results allow no definite conclusions supporting the anti-cancer activity of Laetrile."
Although the NCI mailing had not been designed to uncover negative case reports, 220 physicians submitted data on more than 1,000 patients who had received Laetrile without any beneficial response.
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 [8]. 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 [9].
Bradford and American Biologics responded to the study with three different lawsuits against the National Cancer Institute, alleging that as a result of the study, they had sustained serious financial damage from a drastic drop in demand for Laetrile. All three suits were thrown out of court. Today few sources of laetrile are available within the United States, but it still is utilized at Mexican clinics and marketed as amygdalin or "vitamin B17" through the Internet."
"In response to political pressure, the National Cancer Institute did two studies involving Laetrile. The first was a retrospective analysis of patients treated with Laetrile. Letters were written to 385,000 physicians in the United States as well as 70,000 other health professionals requesting case reports of cancer patients who were thought to have benefited from using Laetrile. In addition, the various pro-Laetrile groups were asked to provide information concerning any such patients.
Although it had been estimated that at least 70,000 Americans had used Laetrile—only 93 cases were submitted for evaluation. Twenty-six of these reports lacked adequate documentation to permit evaluation. The remaining 68 cases were "blinded" and submitted to an expert panel for review, along with data from 68 similar patients who had received chemotherapy. That way the panel did not know what treatment patients had received. The panel felt that two of the Laetrile-treated cases demonstrated complete remission of disease, four displayed partial remission, and the remaining 62 cases had exhibited no measurable response. No attempt was made to verify that any of the patients who might have benefited from Laetrile actually existed. The reviewers concluded that "the results allow no definite conclusions supporting the anti-cancer activity of Laetrile."
Although the NCI mailing had not been designed to uncover negative case reports, 220 physicians submitted data on more than 1,000 patients who had received Laetrile without any beneficial response.
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 [8]. 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 [9].
Bradford and American Biologics responded to the study with three different lawsuits against the National Cancer Institute, alleging that as a result of the study, they had sustained serious financial damage from a drastic drop in demand for Laetrile. All three suits were thrown out of court. Today few sources of laetrile are available within the United States, but it still is utilized at Mexican clinics and marketed as amygdalin or "vitamin B17" through the Internet."
DJLegacy2k1
New member
LMAO @ siting a site that is also talking about Controlled Demolitions on 9/11, UFOs, and Conspiracy theories as a source for credible information.
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Your guess? I think he admitted it a few weeks back...then he announced he had cancer...But I gave him a magic apple and he's all better now.
You think government sites are better? Fuck its just the opposite. I dont believe in fuckin ufo's or any of that bullshit but it doesnt mean what he wrote about laetrile isnt true. Laugh away, man i dont care, im the one making money selling seeds
DJLegacy2k1
New member
tr00, baller status in the Geo Metro! Get it son!
The thing is, I make my chevy geo look like a Ferrari. I look THAT good, and my confidence shines light the sun. Plus, I sell apricot seeds
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Well when you put it that way...
this is the problem bro.
people should not be getting serious medical advice
from a normal 21yr old with zero medical training.
dangerous game, i wouldn't be so cocky, gonna get lawsuit pwned
chris302001
Banned
what are they gonna sue him for? his geo?
sig worthy
chris302001
Banned
He does claim to cure cancer.....
what if the product caused death via cyanide od?
DJLegacy2k1
New member
What a cluster fack
mrplunkey
New member
It has something to do with the wording, but I'm not sure of the specifics. People can claim some crazy shit, but I think it has to be an indirect.
PICK3
New member
mrplunkey
New member
but incarceration time wasn't factored into teh 5 year plan
My guess is the thought of incarceration give you wood.
PICK3
New member
still would be funny if Glad ended up with the inventor of Vibrams as his celly
just sayin'
DJLegacy2k1
New member
I think if any person bought seeds from Glad and saved these threads where he tells everyone it will cure cancer, he would be held liable. If his site just says "Vitamin B4urass" then he did nothing illegal. Someone should save all of Glad's threads where he is promoting it as a cure and then offer to OD for us so we can watch Glad piss himself in jail
chris302001
Banned
so we can watch Glad piss himself in jail
wouldnt be the first time lol
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Glad & Rach would make the perfect E-couple!
mrplunkey
New member
The Vibrams guy would never go to jail. Anyone dumb enough to pay $85 for a "barefoot experience" probably doesn't understand the legal system enough to know they can file a complaint.
Im not reading this entire thread...matter of fact...I didn't make it past the first five posts....
cancer is kind of the anti-degenerative disease tho ...mkay?
Im sure hilarity ensued at some point in this thread tho...carry on
cancer is kind of the anti-degenerative disease tho ...mkay?
Im sure hilarity ensued at some point in this thread tho...carry on
DJLegacy2k1
New member
lol @ plunky trying to be smart...its so cute
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Shirlz...stfu ur killing our buzz....ur way late to the party
chris302001
Banned
lol its ironic huh!
DJ why don't you eat a dick
DJLegacy2k1
New member
I never said it cured anything, find that post if I did its not what I was saying at all
calveless wonder
New member
legally speaking, there's a big difference between "puffery" which is merely a statement of opinion. i.e. "this is the best thing you'll ever find!" versus claiming something as fact. i.e. "This product WILL cure cancer".
when it's portrayed as a fact, it becomes either implied or expressed warranty in which you're in deep doodoo if it fails to deliver via its guarantee.
i'm glad my SEC edumucation was good for something
mrplunkey
New member
This is what I was looking for -- Structure/Function claims
Structure/function claims have historically appeared on the labels of conventional foods and dietary supplements as well as drugs. However, the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) established some special regulatory procedures for such claims for dietary supplement labels. Structure/function claims describe the role of a nutrient or dietary ingredient intended to affect normal structure or function in humans, for example, "calcium builds strong bones." In addition, they may characterize the means by which a nutrient or dietary ingredient acts to maintain such structure or function, for example, "fiber maintains bowel regularity," or "antioxidants maintain cell integrity," or they may describe general well-being from consumption of a nutrient or dietary ingredient. Structure/function claims may also describe a benefit related to a nutrient deficiency disease (like vitamin C and scurvy), as long as the statement also tells how widespread such a disease is in the United States. The manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and truthfulness of these claims; they are not pre-approved by FDA but must be truthful and not misleading. If a dietary supplement label includes such a claim, it must state in a "disclaimer" that FDA has not evaluated the claim. The disclaimer must also state that the dietary supplement product is not intended to "diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease," because only a drug can legally make such a claim. Further information regarding structure/function claims can be found in FDA's January 9, 2002
Structure/function claims have historically appeared on the labels of conventional foods and dietary supplements as well as drugs. However, the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) established some special regulatory procedures for such claims for dietary supplement labels. Structure/function claims describe the role of a nutrient or dietary ingredient intended to affect normal structure or function in humans, for example, "calcium builds strong bones." In addition, they may characterize the means by which a nutrient or dietary ingredient acts to maintain such structure or function, for example, "fiber maintains bowel regularity," or "antioxidants maintain cell integrity," or they may describe general well-being from consumption of a nutrient or dietary ingredient. Structure/function claims may also describe a benefit related to a nutrient deficiency disease (like vitamin C and scurvy), as long as the statement also tells how widespread such a disease is in the United States. The manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and truthfulness of these claims; they are not pre-approved by FDA but must be truthful and not misleading. If a dietary supplement label includes such a claim, it must state in a "disclaimer" that FDA has not evaluated the claim. The disclaimer must also state that the dietary supplement product is not intended to "diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease," because only a drug can legally make such a claim. Further information regarding structure/function claims can be found in FDA's January 9, 2002
The thing is, your sources are only credible if they submit their work for peer review.
After all, you can claim anything, but unless you show your work to other accredited people to have them objectively assess your work, it remains just your opinion. That's just how it works.
I got all excited to see that this site actually included citations, but when I scrolled down to see the accompanying Works Cited, I did not see anything.
While the sites "talk the talk", they do not give credible sources for their work. So I remain skeptical of any claims that they make.
You say you didn't claim it helps cancer patients?
You say chemo doesn't work, you quote someone who said it helped their aunt fight cancer, you imply that cancer can be stopped, just like scurvy, by finding that one thing that scientists haven't found (laetrile).
You are absolutely telling us, albeit indirectly, that your business can help people with cancer.
I am not saying you don't have the right to sell these seeds, but I am saying that, even if you don't advertise, that are you well positioned to make money off of other people's misery, and you are not giving them anything in return but false hope.
The tags roflolz
Did I see that somebody bought a Geo? Not good for a five year plan.
chris302001
Banned
But I thought his dad paid cash? If that's not baller, I don't know what is.
DJ theres not one post where I said it cured anything
A geo is just to get around, in 5 years i WILL have a corvette
A geo is just to get around, in 5 years i WILL have a corvette
a geo what? like a little 3 cylinder thing? 5 yr plan with vette in future does not make you cool now babe.
Chick: "So, what do you do for a living?"
Glad: "I sell seeds to suckers."
Neither does that, upon further inspection.
i was not making fun of his seeds
Similar threads
