I researched laetril back in 2002-2003, or was it, 2001-2002.
B-17 as it is now referred to, is a compound that when metabolized inside of mamalian cells, breaks down into hydrogen cyanide. Now, cancer cells have no metabolic way to deal with this compound and thusly, it is selectively toxic to cancer. Our cells can metabolize hydrogen cyanide but only up to a certain point.
By this description, B-17, has many characteristics of some chemotherapy agents, which are selectively toxic. The trick is, how much can you titrate the dose upwards until you get maximum effect without causing side affects and toxicity.
The way b-17 works, higher doses are more lethal to cancer.
So, dosing is not that scientific, as laetrile or b-17 does not fall under FDA scrutiny and the promoters of such have indeed brought lawyers and data to the court room so that laetril is not illegal.
What I do know for certain about laetril is this:
1)It can become toxic at higher doses, but its effectiveness is also dose dependant.
2)It will increase the permiability of cancer cell membranes, (Brewer,) and improve other therapies.
3)It does not have very accurate dosing parameters as there is no FDA requirements of pharmaceutical type testing and titrating.
4)It should not be used as only therapy for cancer.
5)Is a good preventative in low to moderate dosing.
Cancer can become resistant to laetril, so I look at b-17 as an adjunct to other chemo/alternative therapies.
Laetril can be given with alkaline, vitamin c, and oxygen therapies.
Should you take laetril?
Well, when looking at clinical trials of other substances, like cesium chloride, the percentage of response for cancer cases is higher in other therapies. This doesn't mean that b-17 should be ignored. The single biggest promoter of cesium chloride, which had great response in trials, also recommends b-17 as additional adjunct to the same cesium chloride therapy.