When diagnosed with cancer, it is human nature to explore any and all avenues in the hopes of arriving at the best possible outcome. For some, this involves building a team of qualified health care practitioners, each fulfilling a unique purpose that complements the actions of the others. For example, many patients augment their team of family physician, medical oncologist, radiation oncologist and surgeon with a licensed naturopathic doctor experienced in cancer care, a therapist or counselor, and possibly a chiropractor or massage therapist. When such a team is willing and able to work in unison, the patient outcomes are only the better for it. Truly, the sum is greater than the parts.
Unfortunately, many patients, driven by lack of education/financial resources, false promises, or the unwavering search for a “silver bullet”, resort to more dangerous means. It goes without saying that one can find a persuasive argument to support or refute just about anything via a simple online search. When this strategy is used as cancer treatment, the risks can quite rapidly outweigh any potential (if unsubstantiated) benefits. One such example involves the use of apricot seeds to combat cancer, through selective cyanide poisoning. The gist of the theory is based upon the fact that apricot kernels contain a compound called amygdalin (related compounds are called laetrile, or B17) which, once ingested, is converted to cyanide. Where the theory breaks down is through claims that these trace amounts of cyanide, now circulating through the body, are able to exert their toxic effects on cancer cells, while sparing healthy cells. While there is a shortage of evidence supporting these claims, there are studies illustrating how ingesting even low doses of these compounds may lead to cyanide poisoning. In one such case, a 67-year old man diagnosed with prostate cancer had been consuming two teaspoons of apricot kernels and three capsules of a similar blend, each day for five years. When admitted for a routine procedure, it was realized that his blood oxygen levels had deteriorated significantly, and his blood cyanide levels were 25 times above the normal limit—clear signs of cyanide poisoning. Of course, additional research may, in time, show legitimate anti-cancer benefits to compounds such as these. However, until the safety and potential efficacy of a substance, natural or otherwise, is adequately determined, it is not advisable to risk further harm for a debatable, theoretical benefit.
Undertaking conventional cancer treatment can be a long and grueling process, often with fewer highs than lows. But evidence has shown that in a number of cases, these scales can be tipped in the patient’s favour when proven integrative, whole-body strategies are added to the mix. However, when the focus shifts toward risky, unproven therapies in the hopes of finding a “miracle cure”, it risks negating everything done to that point, and causing more harm than good.
Konstantatos A, et.al. An unusual presentation of chronic cyanide toxicity from self-prescribed apricot kernel extract. BMJ Case Reports 2017; doi:10.1136/bcr-2017-220814.
