Soursop Destroys Cancer Cells, According To Studies

Soursop Destroys Cancer Cells, According To Studies





Soursop is the fruit of Annona muricata, tropical parts of Africa but can also be found today in the Caribbean, South American and Southeast Asia.

The fruit can be eaten and used in may ways but many people typical squeeze it into a drink. Some traditional claims are that soursop has the ability heal several diseases, including cancer.

These claims have prompted researchers to study soursop to see if it can protect against and prevent cancer.

The National Cancer Institute initially discovered the effect of soursop on cancer stating, “leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells.” Since then, over 20 independent labs studied soupsop to see if it had anti-cancer effects and came to similar conclusions:

Purdue University concluded that soursop leaves “killed cancer cells among six human cell lines”. The scientists also found soursop leaves were particularly effective against prostate and pancreatic cancers.

Another study published in the Journal of Natural Products concluded that one element found in the soursop was 10,000 times more effective than a chemotherapy drug called Adriamycin.

The Catholic University of South Korea found that not only did soupsop rid cancer cells effectively, but also didn’t effect healthy cells. This is opposite of chemotherapy, where all the cells are destroyed, both the good and the bad cells.

http://alkalinevalleyfoods.com/soursop-destroys-cancer-cells-according-to-studies/


Before my friend Lisa had her first round of chemo, she has already started this and the cannibis oil.
She had a scan after her first lot of chemo and the doctor was really surprised how well she was doing - he even said "Oh the chemo is working very quickly"
She told him about the soursop and the oil and he told her to carry on doing what she was doing 'at home'.

Good news if this is proven to work.

Soursop

Soursop is the fruit of Annona muricata, a broadleaf, flowering, evergreen tree native to Mexico, Cuba, Central America, the Caribbean islands of Hispaniola and Puerto Rico, and northern South America, pri…
[url=javascript:void(0);][/url]

Soursop is the fruit of Annona muricata, a broadleaf, flowering, evergreen tree native to Mexico, Cuba, Central America, the Caribbean islands of Hispaniola and Puerto Rico, and northern South America, primarily Colombia, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela. Soursop is also produced in all tropical parts of Africa, especially in Eastern Nigeria, The Plateau and The Democratic Republic of Congo, Southeast Asia and the Pacific. It is in the same genus, Annona, as cherimoya and is in the Annonaceae family.
en.wikipedia.org · Text under CC-BY-SA license
Wikipedia

• Scientific name: Annona muricata
  
• Biological classification: Species
  
• Belongs to: Annona
  

********************************************

WOW, what an amazing plant. 
Never heard of it but now I'm hoping to find one and try it.  I like trying new fruits.
And TY for the update on you BFF, Lisa; I'd meant to ask but get busy and forget to send you a PM.  Seems she's being very 'pro-active' in her own treatment and all of the Xtra that she's doing is helping her immensely!

Can graviola (soursop) cure cancer?

Graviola (soursop) is a common food and drink in Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia. You can read about

• What is graviola?
  
• Graviola and cancer
  
• What is graviola used for?
  

• Possible side effects of graviola
  
• How much does graviola cost?
  
• Related information
  

 
 

What is graviola?

Graviola comes from a tree in the rain forests of Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia. Its scientific name is Annona muricata. It is also known as custard apple, cherimoya, guanabana, soursop and brazilian paw paw. The active ingredient is thought to be a type of plant compound (phytochemical) called annonaceous acetogenins.
Back to top

 

Graviola and cancer

Overall, there is no evidence to show that graviola works as a cure for cancer. In laboratory studies, graviola extracts can kill some types of liver and breast cancer cells that are resistant to particular chemotherapy drugs. But there haven’t been any studies in humans. So we don't know whether it can work as a cancer treatment or not. 
Many sites on the internet advertise and promote graviola capsules as a cancer cure but none of them are supported by any reputable scientific cancer organisations.
We do not support the use of graviola to treat cancer. Our advice is to be very cautious about believing information or paying for any type of alternative cancer therapy on the internet.
Back to top

 

What is graviola used for?

People in African and South American countries have used graviola to treat infections with viruses or parasites, rheumatism, arthritis, depression, and sickness. We know from research that some graviola extracts can help to treat these conditions. In many countries, people use the bark, leaves, root, and fruits of this tree for traditional remedies.
Back to top

 

Possible side effects of graviola

We don’t know much about how graviola affects the body. But some researchers are concerned that particular chemicals present in graviola may cause nerve changes and movement disorders when taken in large amounts. The nerve changes may cause symptoms similar to Parkinson's disease. Laboratory research has found that some substances in graviola cause nerve damage and that these substances can cross into the brain from the bloodstream.
One research study has shown that people in the Caribbean who had large amounts of graviola in their diet were more likely to develop particular nerve changes and were also more likely to have hallucinations. It is unlikely that drinks or foods containing graviola could harm you when taken as part of a normal diet. But always talk to your doctor before taking any kind of complementary or alternative therapy.
Back to top

 

How much does graviola cost?

Graviola costs more than £5 for 100 capsules. The manufacturers advise taking 2 capsules, 3 to 4 times a day. So 100 capsules could last less than 2 weeks.

Read more at http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancers-in-general/cancer-questions/can-graviola-cure-cancer#eUpEHbpmQiPtQXhX.99

BUT Didge...

provided she is careful...doesnt "over do it" and continues with the chemo ...as eddie says she does and continues to liase with her doctor/oncologist

then I can see no harm....who knows...maybe it IS doing some good.....

maybe its not an outright "cure" but it may well be a helpful adjunct.....I dont blame her for trying

Lord Foul wrote:BUT Didge...

provided she is careful...doesnt "over do it" and continues with the chemo ...as eddie says she does and continues to liase with her doctor/oncologist

then I can see no harm....who knows...maybe it IS doing some good.....

maybe its not an outright "cure"  but it may well be a helpful adjunct.....I dont blame her for trying

Victor with someone Palliative, i would not discourage anything and that was not my point.
In such a scenario, where survival is bleak, I again would not discourage trying anything.
To those not terminal however and based on taking this as warned in high dosages in tablet form, then you could very well suffer other complications as explained. If it does have capabilities to help, then this needs to be researched further and also to help deal with the possibilities of side effects. All I am doing is providing a sound mendical researched view on the product

I would reckon they've read your links Didge but the cancer institute apparently think differently.

"The National Cancer Institute initially discovered the effect of soursop on cancer stating, “leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells.” Since then, over 20 independent labs studied soupsop to see if it had anti-cancer effects and came to similar conclusions:
Purdue University concluded that soursop leaves “killed cancer cells among six human cell lines”. The scientists also found soursop leaves were particularly effective against prostate and pancreatic cancers.

Another study published in the Journal of Natural Products concluded that one element found in the soursop was 10,000 times more effective than a chemotherapy drug called Adriamycin."

So I think they may be a step ahead of any of our research. We shall see.

eddie wrote:I would reckon they've read your links Didge but the cancer institute apparently think differently.

"The National Cancer Institute initially discovered the effect of soursop on cancer stating, “leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells.” Since then, over 20 independent labs studied soupsop to see if it had anti-cancer effects and came to similar conclusions:
Purdue University concluded that soursop leaves “killed cancer cells among six human cell lines”. The scientists also found soursop leaves were particularly effective against prostate and pancreatic cancers.

Another study published in the Journal of Natural Products concluded that one element found in the soursop was 10,000 times more effective than a chemotherapy drug called Adriamycin."

So I think they may be a step ahead of any of our research. We shall see.

Which shows you did not read my link.

Overall, there is no evidence to show that graviola works as a cure for cancer. In laboratory studies, graviola extracts can kill some types of liver and breast cancer cells that are resistant to particular chemotherapy drugs. But there haven’t been any studies in humans. So we don't know whether it can work as a cancer treatment or not. 
Many sites on the internet advertise and promote graviola capsules as a cancer cure but none of them are supported by any reputable scientific cancer organisations.

Oh well, two different articles and two diferent opnions by studies and scientist.
Always the way.

The truth is somewhere in the middle as always.

eddie wrote:Oh well, two different articles and two diferent opnions by studies and scientist.
Always the way.

The truth is somewhere in the middle as always.

Its not different opinions, both agreed, that in lab tests some types of cancer cells have been killed.
They both agree on this.
What you fail to see to grasp Eddie is the expense on trying so many different claims to work on cancer, when at present some of the best methods, without the problem of side effects are being worked on. I have posted many on this very section, where that money is going to be far more better spent on research that has already now ready at the stage of testing or has tested on humans. Do you even begin to understand by adding another ingredient to be researched alongside others, by pulling away resources, how further back you could delay an actual cure, in time and in money?

Okay Didge. Well oil and soursop, taken properly and with your doctors knowledge, is working very well for a lot of people. So that's good.

I read a lot of cases of cancer caused by asbestos (did you sign the petition I put up btw?) and most people use these products, and apricot kernels, after chemo has finished, and despite them being given a year or two to live, are still alive 7 or even 20 years (longest case) later.

Google Mesothelioma survival stories

eddie wrote:Okay Didge. Well oil and soursop, taken properly and with your doctors knowledge, is working very well for a lot of people. So that's good.

I read a lot of cases of cancer caused by asbestos (did you sign the petition I put up btw?) and most people use these products, and apricot kernels, after chemo has finished, and despite them being given a year or two to live, are still alive 7 or even 20 years (longest case) later.

Google Mesothelioma survival stories

No I have not signed and not going to as its a waste of time.
If you want action, then you get parents to stop attending the school until something is done.
That is commiting to action, which then forces the Governement to act.
Eddie you are going off hearsay accounts.
If you put faith in that, then that is your choice, but I have seen no evidence of countless people cured from them, have you?

Didge I don't know. That's why I said, we shall see.
I think studies are in the infant stage and at some point in the future, we will see fruits and plants being used to cure most things.

The cure for everything is to be found in nature.

eddie wrote:Didge I don't know. That's why I said, we shall see.
I think studies are in the infant stage and at some point in the future, we will see fruits and plants being used to cure most things.

The cure for everything is to be found in nature.

The cure is within our own bodies, its just reprogramming our genetic system to actually work corrctly against such problems

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Oh well, two different articles and two diferent opnions by studies and scientist.
Always the way.
The truth is somewhere in the middle as always.

Its not different opinions, both agreed, that in lab tests some types of cancer cells have been killed.
They both agree on this.
What you fail to see to grasp Eddie is the expense on trying so many different claims to work on cancer, when at present some of the best methods, without the problem of side effects are being worked on. I have posted many on this very section, where that money is going to be far more better spent on research that has already now ready at the stage of testing or has tested on humans. Do you even begin to understand by adding another ingredient to be researched alongside others, by pulling away resources, how further back you could delay an actual cure, in time and in money?

Well, you have YOUR OPINION about how and where the research money should be spent and others {myself included} feel that had such natural plant derivatives SHOULD HAVE been used and studied more in depth long ago; we might be far more advanced in our abilities to CURE CANCER then we are currently. 

You see it one way for lab/clinical trials and some of us see it another way!

Eddies article is dated >

Soursop Destroys Cancer Cells, According To Studies
July 2, 2016 by Mike Morris

while your link and subsequent post is just more data that comes from a Wikipedia type of informational data based format - sans the date and any updated material = just info.  That's all it is ...just info, pure and simple.

And while you have a 'POINT' about using any additive cautiously ...the patient suffering from those horrid side affects from the chemo &/or radiation will tell you to MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.
And if this option aids their systems and provides them with ANY comfort then it's their choice and theirs alone to make.  Your approach with any of these articles is to ridicule and refuse to read the information and just ignore the current data - nothing in anything states it's 'CURING CANCER' ...but the offset - side affects that are showing beneficial improvements cannot be ignored.

Again complete failure to understand that the best cure will come from within, and that is genetics, where we can actual work and fund on research that will work and where people will even be prevented from having cancer, espcially those more prone to hereditary types of cancer like my family is with Prostrate, since two uncles, my father and brother have suffered with. So being as this has effected my family greatly, do you no9t think I have researched this constantly? Spare me your pretencious drivel, because its not going to cut it and you have simply zero understanding and would back wolf to advise on this everytime, than yourself. Again its about where best is placed to find the best chance for finding a cure, of which our own bodies do daily growing up dealing with problems, its when the programming goes wrong that then cancer forms. My details come from Cancer UK research

So stop lying

Again the tests were done and found to kill some types of cancer cells, of which there is countless types and again there are far better inovative methods in test phase already and you want to pull away people from this to then in fact create a longer wait for this cure?
Seriously, have you even contermplated this or do you always irrationally go off some infancy lab tests?

Didge wrote:Again complete failure to understand that the best cure will come from within, and that is genetics, where we can actual work and fund on research that will work and where people will even be prevented from having cancer, espcially those more prone to hereditary types of cancer like my family is with Prostrate, since two uncles, my father and brother have suffered with. So being as this has effected my family greatly, do you no9t think I have researched this constantly? Spare me your pretencious drivel, because its not going to cut it and you have simply zero understanding and would back wolf to advise on this everytime, than yourself. Again its about where best is placed to find the best chance for finding a cure, of which our own bodies do daily growing up dealing with problems, its when the programming goes wrong that then cancer forms. My details come from Cancer UK research

So stop lying

Again the tests were done and found to kill some types of cancer cells, of which there is countless types and again there are far better inovative methods in test phase already and you want to pull away people from this to then in fact create a longer wait for this cure?
Seriously, have you even contermplated this or do you always irrationally go off some infancy lab tests?

Since you seem {family history provides you with} finite focused on just GENETIC CANCERS CELLS; you seem oblivious to the fact that we all carry a cell that can morph / mutate into active cancerous active cell given the right incentive/trigger to do so!
Why would you assume that you are the ONLY member here that has been touched by cancer?  Surely you aren't pompous or behave in such a lowered bar morality standard to ASSUME such a asinine thing  
Your hysteria just moves you further away from adult discussion in this single topic and for that I am regretful; because instead of sharing our mutual stories of shared experiences {as Eddie and I have done} you stand as the Single/Soul Survivor and proof personified that you are the All Knowing - Never To Be Wrong In This Cancer Issue. 

That is your loss and your ill regard for stubborn lock minded thinking.
Pretentious - Put Down - Pompous = end of a chance for decent discussion!

Tbh Didge, everything 4ever says is true. You are so closed-minded and actually quite ignorant about cancer and alternative theories that you just argue for the sake of it. It's like you're oblivious to what everyone else has to say.

You do know that you aren't proven right about any of what you post on this matter, right? Studies are on-going and as yet, nothing has been actually proven or disproven.

Just chill and open your mind a little. We all want cancer to be exterminated as it has taken precious people from us.
Stop making it a war.
Leave people with hope even if you think they have none.

4EVER2 wrote:

Didge wrote:Again complete failure to understand that the best cure will come from within, and that is genetics, where we can actual work and fund on research that will work and where people will even be prevented from having cancer, espcially those more prone to hereditary types of cancer like my family is with Prostrate, since two uncles, my father and brother have suffered with. So being as this has effected my family greatly, do you no9t think I have researched this constantly? Spare me your pretencious drivel, because its not going to cut it and you have simply zero understanding and would back wolf to advise on this everytime, than yourself. Again its about where best is placed to find the best chance for finding a cure, of which our own bodies do daily growing up dealing with problems, its when the programming goes wrong that then cancer forms. My details come from Cancer UK research

So stop lying

Again the tests were done and found to kill some types of cancer cells, of which there is countless types and again there are far better inovative methods in test phase already and you want to pull away people from this to then in fact create a longer wait for this cure?
Seriously, have you even contermplated this or do you always irrationally go off some infancy lab tests?

Since you seem {family history provides you with} finite focused on just GENETIC CANCERS CELLS; you seem oblivious to the fact that we all carry a cell that can morph / mutate into active cancerous active cell given the right incentive/trigger to do so!
Why would you assume that you are the ONLY member here that has been touched by cancer?  Surely you aren't pompous or behave in such a lowered bar morality standard to ASSUME such a asinine thing  
Your hysteria just moves you further away from adult discussion in this single topic and for that I am regretful; because instead of sharing our mutual stories of shared experiences {as Eddie and I have done} you stand as the Single/Soul Survivor and proof personified that you are the All Knowing - Never To Be Wrong In This Cancer Issue. 

That is your loss and your ill regard for stubborn lock minded thinking.
Pretentious - Put Down - Pompous = end of a chance for decent discussion!

Your views on me are just simply pathetic and failed to even yet again address a single point
Well back to irrelevance so lets look at Eddies sources


She claims national Cancer Institute, lets see:


NCI Search Results

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Results for: Soursop

Results 0–0 of 0 for: Soursop

Results 0–0 of 0.

http://www.cancer.gov/search/results

So its a disingenious claim by someone out to make money on the product which is evident.
Only the Uk cancer research stated any such views on the product tested in one University

https://www.cancerresearch.purdue.edu/

Soursop: New Cancer treatment or hoax?
This is the photo:


SHARE THIS INFORMATION FIRST AND READ AFTERWARDS…..SAVE LIFE Share this as much as you can.
“10000 times stronger killer of CANCER than Chemo”.. do share it.. can save many lives, fill up hopes and build confidence in the patients…
The Sour Sop or the fruit from the graviola tree is a miraculous natural cancer cell killer 10,000 times stronger than Chemo.
…
Why are we not aware of this? Its because some big corporation want to make back their money spent on years of research by trying to make a synthetic version of it for sale.
So, since you know it now you can help a friend in need by letting him know or just drink some sour sop juice yourself as prevention from time to time. The taste is not bad after all. It’s completely natural and definitely has no side effects. If you have the space, plant one in your garden.
The other parts of the tree are also useful.
The next time you have a fruit juice, ask for a sour sop.
How many people died in vain while this billion-dollar drug maker concealed the secret of the miraculous Graviola tree?
This tree is low and is called graviola ! in Brazi l, guanabana in Spanish and has the uninspiring name “soursop” in English. The fruit is very large and the subacid sweet white pulp is eaten out of hand or, more commonly, used to make fruit drinks, sherbets and such.
The principal interest in this plant is because of its strong anti-cancer effects. Although it is effective for a number of medical conditions, it is its anti tumor effect that is of most interest. This plant is a proven cancer remedy for cancers of all types.
Besides being a cancer remedy, graviola is a broad spectrum antimicrobial agent for both bacterial and fungal infections, is effective against internal parasites and worms, lowers high blood pressure and is used for depression, stress and nervous disorders.
If there ever was a single example that makes it dramatically clear why the existence of Health Sciences Institute is so vital to Americans like you, it’s the incredible story behind the Graviola tree..
The truth is stunningly simple: Deep within the Amazon Rainforest grows a tree that could literally revolutionize what you, your doctor, and the rest of the world thinks about cancer treatment and chances of survival. The future has never looked more promising.
Research shows that with extracts from this miraculous tree it now may be possible to:
* Attack cancer safely and effectively with an all-natural therapy that does not cause extreme nausea, weight loss and hair loss
* Protect your immune system and avoid deadly infections
* Feel stronger and healthier throughout the course of the treatment
* Boost your energy and improve your outlook on life
The source of this information is just as stunning: It comes from one of America ‘s largest drug manufacturers, th! e fruit of over 20 laboratory tests conducted since the 1970’s! What those tests revealed was nothing short of mind numbing… Extracts from the tree were shown to:
* Effectively target and kill malignant cells in 12 types of cancer, including colon, breast, prostate, lung and pancreatic cancer..
* The tree compounds proved to be up to 10,000 times stronger in slowing the growth of cancer cells than Adriamycin, a commonly used chemotherapeutic drug!
* What’s more, unlike chemotherapy, the compound extracted from the Graviola tree selectivelyhunts down and kills only cancer cells.. It does not harm healthy cells!
The amazing anti-cancer properties of the Graviola tree have been extensively researched–so why haven’t you heard anything about it? If Graviola extract is One of America ‘s biggest billion-dollar drug makers began a search for a cancer cure and their research centered on Graviola, a legendary healing tree from the Amazon Rainforest.
Various parts of the Graviola tree–including the bark, leaves, roots, fruit and fruit-seeds–have been used for centuries by medicine men and native Indi! ans in S outh America to treat heart disease, asthma, liver problems and arthritis. Going on very little documented scientific evidence, the company poured money and resources into testing the tree’s anti-cancerous properties–and were shocked by the results. Graviola proved itself to be a cancer-killing dynamo. But that’s where the Graviola story nearly ended.
The company had one huge problem with the Graviola tree–it’s completely natural, and so, under federal law, not patentable. There’s no way to make serious profits from it.
It turns out the drug company invested nearly seven years trying to synthesize two of the Graviola tree’s most powerful anti-cancer ingredients. If they could isolate and produce man-made clones of what makes the Graviola so potent, they’d be able to patent it and make their money back. Alas, they hit a brick wall. The original simply could not be replicated. There was no way the company could protect its profits–or even make back the millions it poured into research.
As the dream of huge profits evaporated, their testing on Graviola came to a screeching halt. Even worse, the company shelved the entire project and chose not to publish the findings of its research!
Luckily, however, there was one scientist from the Graviola research team whose conscience wouldn’t let him see such atrocity committed. Risking his career, he contacted a company that’s dedicated to harvesting medical plants from the Amazon Rainforest and blew the whistle.
Miracle unleashed
When researchers at the Health Sciences Institute were alerted to the news of Graviola,! they be gan tracking the research done on the cancer-killing tree. Evidence of the astounding effectiveness of Graviola–and its shocking cover-up–came in fast and furious….
….The National Cancer Institute performed the first scientific research in 1976. The results showed that Graviola’s “leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells.” Inexplicably, the results were published in an internal report and never released to the public…
….Since 1976, Graviola has proven to be an immensely potent cancer killer in 20 independent laboratory tests, yet no double-blind clinical trials–the typical benchmark mainstream doctors and journals use to judge a treatment’s value–were ever initiated….
….A study published in the Journal of Natural Products, following a recent study conducted at Catholic University of South Korea stated that one chemical in Graviola was found to selectively kill colon cancer cells at “10,000 times the potency of (the commonly used chemotherapy drug) Adriamycin…”
….The most significant part of the Catholic University of South Korea report is that Graviola was shown to selectively target the cancer cells, leaving healthy cells untouched. Unlike chemotherapy, which indiscriminately targets all actively reproducing cells (such as stomach and hair cells), causing the often devastating side effects of nausea and hair loss in cancer patients.
…A study at Purdue University recently found that leaves from the Graviola tree killed cancer cells among six human cell lines and were especially effective against prostate, pancreatic and lung cancers Seven years of silence broken–it’s finally here!!!










This hoax made an appearance on my Facebook wall a few months back and it angers me every time it reappears – I hate to think how many people have chosen this over life saving treatments for cancer. It angers me thinking about the harm this hoax has caused.
For readers of mine who don’t know, Graviola (also known as Soursop) is a fruit that grows in South America, parts of Africa and Southeast Asia. It’s also been linked to a rise in atypical Parkinson’s disease among natives that eat the fruit in high doses due to containing a very high concentration of annonacin. According to CancerResearchUK “Laboratory research has found that some substances in Graviola cause nerve damage and that these substances can cross into the brain from the bloodstream”.
Just to be clear: Atypical Parkinson’s is not the same as degenerative genetic Parkinson’s. Atypical Parkinson’s is also known as drug induced Parkinson’s and as mentioned before, the fruit is known to have very high concentration of annonacin which is known to be a cause of nerve damage.
Soursop does have certain health benefits, namely its anti-parasitic, anti-microbial and anti-depressive properties, and a study has shown it may have potential as a chemotherapeutical – largely in part the active components of the tree. However just because it has these properties doesn’t mean eating the fruit itself will cause those properties to fight cancer.
“10000 times stronger killer of CANCER than Chemo”.


This is a misleading statement – a 1996 study found that a compound isolated and extracted from the seeds of annona muricata (Soursop) had potency higher than that of the chemotherapy drug adriamycin on colon adenocarcinoma cells. Those results were only for one type of chemotherapy drug being used to treat one type of cancer. The cancer patient would need to eat the seeds as opposed to the actual fruit itself to receive the annona muricata compound. Further to that, even if the seeds have cancer killing properties for even one type of cancer – we have no dosage information. There have never been human trials into the effectiveness of this compound on other types of cancer, let alone humans with cancer. Without human testing and the creation of a safe effective dose regulated drug – people consuming the seeds of the fruit open themselves up to potential toxic side effects, Parkinson’s or worse based on no evidence.

There are in vitro trials being conducted on the viability of being able to harness the extract of the fruit that shows potential in fighting cancer cells however it isn’t as simple as “eat the fruit and your cancer will go away”. In vitro meaning laboratory testing – not human trials. We’re a long way off from human trials – we first need to understand how the seed compound works, whether there are any side effects or potential to harm people and whether it actually can fight cancer or eradicate it altogether, let alone whether it works on humans or what dosages to give them. We also need to take into consideration the fact what happens to cells in a petri dish can be very different to what happens to cells in body, especially in an environment with thousands of other compounds which are either naturally produced or introduced via eating or drinking. We still have no idea how this compound would react on cancer within the body.

I call this a hoax because the statements made above accompanied by the photo are incredibly misleading – with further research down the line we maybe able to extract and harness the compound that has the potential to fight cancer cells and we maybe able to create a drug from that extraction that can help in eliminating cancers but cancer patients aren’t going to be cured by eating the fruit. Currently we have no cure for the various types of cancer. To all the people who email me asking whether this fruit will help with their cancer or their friends cancer – we need further research to make it safe. We need human trials to ascertain any side effects so people don’t die or get Parkinson’s. We need further research to extract the active ingredient to ascertain whether or not it can fight cancer cells. Cancer is terrifying and there are many charlatans out there who offer miracle cures for money who prey on vulnerable people – please talk to your oncologist before wasting your money and time on hoax’s and scams designed to drain your wallet.
The Soursop Facebook status is another misleading statement dressed up as a cure to give people false hope and steer them away from medical treatment.


http://www.insufferableintolerance.com/soursop-new-cancer-treatment-hoax/

The National Cancer Institute initially discovered the effect of soursop on cancer stating, “leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells.” Since then, over 20 independent labs studied soupsop to see if it had anti-cancer effects and came to similar conclusions:

Purdue University concluded that soursop leaves “killed cancer cells among six human cell lines”. The scientists also found soursop leaves were particularly effective against prostate and pancreatic cancers.

Well, I am thankful that the research and study continues and I appreciate the informative article that you bring in here to share, Eddie.  I'll leave it to the educated professionals and all of  THEIR EDUCATED PROCESS to do the right thing and to keep us informed as their studies break more barriers and prove more of the data!

   much like people falling for the 8% of the 'What If' that Faux News provides or some 'BLOGGER' who never has to prove what misquotes they pull together; it's all in the information and the places that we CHOSE to read. 
If reading the bilge that is provided by FB upsets you so rabidly Didge, then by all means cease reading that waste of bandwidth and don't drag the lunacy in here to waste more space!    Just say'n

4EVER2 wrote:

The National Cancer Institute initially discovered the effect of soursop on cancer stating, “leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells.” Since then, over 20 independent labs studied soupsop to see if it had anti-cancer effects and came to similar conclusions:

Purdue University concluded that soursop leaves “killed cancer cells among six human cell lines”. The scientists also found soursop leaves were particularly effective against prostate and pancreatic cancers.

Well, I am thankful that the research and study continues and I appreciate the informative article that you bring in here to share, Eddie.  I'll leave it to the educated professionals and all of  THEIR EDUCATED PROCESS to do the right thing and to keep us informed as their studies break more barriers and prove more of the data!

   much like people falling for the 8% of the 'What If' that Faux News provides or some 'BLOGGER' who never has to prove what misquotes they pull together; it's all in the information and the places that we CHOSE to read. 
If reading the bilge that is provided by FB upsets you so rabidly Didge, then by all means cease reading that waste of bandwidth and don't drag the lunacy in here to waste more space!    Just say'n

Where is the evidence for the claims above?

I mean where is all the many Cancer research sites also backing the claims made?

Doh

Talk about being very gullible lol

Its easy to research this and find many of the claims being made from the original resource are disingenious

Then my link backed this up with real evidence, and all you can come back with is unfounded and not backed up evidence

I suggest you put up or shut up lol

eddie wrote:Tbh Didge, everything 4ever says is true. You are so closed-minded and actually quite ignorant about cancer and alternative theories that you just argue for the sake of it. It's like you're oblivious to what everyone else has to say.

You do know that you aren't proven right about any of what you post on this matter, right? Studies are on-going and as yet, nothing has been actually proven or disproven.

Just chill and open your mind a little. We all want cancer to be exterminated as it has taken precious people from us.
Stop making it a war.
Leave people with hope even if you think they have none.

Its true now is it, because you read it on some natural remedy site?


Do not patronize me with being open minded, I have had family die from cancer and how do you not think I look into everything.

The fact is the link you posted went off a half truth, lied over the Cancer Institute, when it was in fact the Uk cancer research who dismissed it based on its side effect.
You want to leave people with false hope Eddie, where i offger them real hope in real research that could save their lives

Rome was not built in a day, and neither are cures

Didge wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:
Since you seem {family history provides you with} finite focused on just GENETIC CANCERS CELLS; you seem oblivious to the fact that we all carry a cell that can morph / mutate into active cancerous active cell given the right incentive/trigger to do so!
Why would you assume that you are the ONLY member here that has been touched by cancer?  Surely you aren't pompous or behave in such a lowered bar morality standard to ASSUME such a asinine thing  
Your hysteria just moves you further away from adult discussion in this single topic and for that I am regretful; because instead of sharing our mutual stories of shared experiences {as Eddie and I have done} you stand as the Single/Soul Survivor and proof personified that you are the All Knowing - Never To Be Wrong In This Cancer Issue. 

That is your loss and your ill regard for stubborn lock minded thinking.
Pretentious - Put Down - Pompous = end of a chance for decent discussion!

Your views on me are just simply pathetic and failed to even yet again address a single point
Well back to irrelevance so lets look at Eddies sources


She claims national Cancer Institute, lets see:


NCI Search Results

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Results for: Soursop

Results 0–0 of 0 for: Soursop

Results 0–0 of 0.

http://www.cancer.gov/search/results

So its a disingenious claim by someone out to make money on the product which is evident.
Only the Uk cancer research stated any such views on the product tested in one University

https://www.cancerresearch.purdue.edu/

To show again how disingenious the article posted was

Ben should do something about this site being used to advertize dodgy products, where companies are out to exploit the vunerbale, i find that disgusting

Graviola Cancer Cure

Is the fruit from the graviola tree a miraculous natural cancer cell killer?

David Mikkelson   From the archive
Claim:   The fruit from the graviola tree is a miraculous natural cancer cell killer.

---

UNDETERMINED

Example:   [Collected via e-mail, January 2012]

CANCER KILLER – Natural Cancer Cell Killer 10,000 Times Stronger Than Chemo!

The Sour Sop or the fruit from the graviola tree is a miraculous natural cancer cell killer 10,000 times stronger than Chemo.

Why are we not aware of this? Its because some big corporation want to make back their money spent on years of research by trying to make a synthetic version of it for sale.

So, since you know it now you can help a friend in need by letting him know or just drink some sour sop juice yourself as prevention from time to time. The taste is not bad after all. It’s completely natural and definitely has no side effects. If you have the space, plant one in your garden.

The other parts of the tree are also useful. 
The next time you have a fruit juice, ask for a sour sop. 
How many people died in vain while this billion-dollar drug maker concealed the secret of the miraculous Graviola tree?

This tree is low and is called graviola in Brazil, guanabana in Spanish and has the uninspiring name "soursop" in English. The fruit is very large and the subacid sweet white pulp is eaten out of hand or, more commonly, used to make fruit drinks, sherbets and such. 
The principal interest in this plant is because of its strong anti-cancer effects. Although it is effective for a number of medical
conditions, it is its anti tumor effect that is of most interest. This plant is a proven cancer remedy for cancers of all types. 
Besides being a cancer remedy, graviola is a broad spectrum antimicrobial agent for both bacterial and fungal infections, is effective against internal parasites and worms, lowers high blood pressure and is used for depression, stress and nervous disorders.

If there ever was a single example that makes it dramatically clear why the existence of Health Sciences Institute is so vital to Americans like you, it’s the incredible story behind the Graviola tree..

The truth is stunningly simple: Deep within the Amazon Rainforest grows a tree that could literally revolutionize what you, your doctor, and the rest of the world thinks about cancer treatment and chances of survival. The future has never looked more promising.

Research shows that with extracts from this miraculous tree it now may be possible to:
* Attack cancer safely and effectively with an all-natural therapy that does not cause extreme nausea, weight loss and hair loss
* Protect your immune system and avoid deadly infections
* Feel stronger and healthier throughout the course of the treatment
* Boost your energy and improve your outlook on life

The source of this information is just as stunning: It comes from one of America ‘s largest drug manufacturers, the fruit of over 20 laboratory tests conducted since the 1970's! What those tests revealed was nothing short of mind numbing… Extracts from the tree were shown to:

* Effectively target and kill malignant cells in 12 types of cancer, including colon, breast, prostate, lung and pancreatic cancer.
* The tree compounds proved to be up to 10,000 times stronger in slowing the growth of cancer cells than Adriamycin, a commonly used chemotherapeutic drug!
* What’s more, unlike chemotherapy, the compound extracted from the Graviola tree selectively hunts down and kills only cancer cells.. It does not harm healthy cells!

The amazing anti-cancer properties of the Graviola tree have been extensively researched — so why haven’t you heard anything about it?

One of America‘s biggest billion-dollar drug makers began a search for a cancer cure and their research centered on Graviola, a legendary healing tree from the Amazon Rainforest.

Various parts of the Graviola tree — including the bark, leaves, roots, fruit and fruit-seeds — have been used for centuries by medicine men and native Indians in South America to treat heart disease, asthma, liver problems and arthritis. Going on very little documented scientific evidence, the company poured money and resources into testing the tree’s anti-cancerous properties — and were shocked by the results. Graviola proved itself to be a cancer-killing dynamo.

But that’s where the Graviola story nearly ended.

The company had one huge problem with the Graviola tree — it’s completely natural, and so, under federal law, not patentable. There’s no way to make serious profits from it.

It turns out the drug company invested nearly seven years trying to synthesize two of the Graviola tree's most powerful anti-cancer ingredients. If they could isolate and produce man-made clones of what makes the Graviola so potent, they’d be able to patent it and make their money back. Alas, they hit a brick wall. The original simply could not be replicated. There was no way the company could protect its profits — or even make back the millions it poured into research.

As the dream of huge profits evaporated, their testing on Graviola came to a screeching halt. Even worse, the company shelved the entire project and chose not to publish the findings of its research!

Luckily, however, there was one scientist from the Graviola research team whose conscience wouldn’t let him see such atrocity committed. Risking his career, he contacted a company that’s dedicated to harvesting medical plants from the Amazon Rainforest and blew the whistle.

When researchers at the Health Sciences Institute were alerted to the news of Graviola, they began tracking the research done on the cancer-killing tree. Evidence of the astounding effectiveness of Graviola — and its shocking cover-up — came in fast and furious….

….The National Cancer Institute performed the first scientific research in 1976. The results showed that Graviola’s "leaves and stems were found effective in attacking and destroying malignant cells." Inexplicably, the results were published in an internal report and never released to the public…

….Since 1976, Graviola has proven to be an immensely potent cancer killer in 20 independent laboratory tests, yet no double-blind clinical trials–the typical benchmark mainstream doctors and journals use to judge a treatment's value — were ever initiated….

….A study published in the Journal of Natural Products, following a recent study conducted at Catholic University of South Korea stated that one chemical in Graviola was found to selectively kill colon cancer cells at "10,000 times the potency of (the commonly used chemotherapy drug) Adriamycin…"

….The most significant part of the Catholic University of South Korea report is that Graviola was shown to selectively target the cancer cells, leaving healthy cells untouched. Unlike chemotherapy, which indiscriminately targets all actively reproducing cells (such as stomach and hair cells), causing the often devastating side effects of nausea and hair loss in cancer patients.

…A study at Purdue University recently found that leaves from the Graviola tree killed cancer cells among six human cell lines and were especially effective against prostate, pancreatic and lung cancers…. Seven years of silence broken — it's finally here!
http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/graviola.asp

So it's a STALE MATE; and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it 

Pitch one of your infamous vile ranting fits - tell me I'm deflecting - dodging - Whatever ...it won't matter because it won't make you move off of that SOS {stuck on stupid} stump and that's just ok with me!

Snopes?



How about a genuine science site please

Didge wrote:Ben should do something about this site being used to advertize dodgy products, where companies are out to exploit the vunerbale, i find that disgusting

We do have a disclaimer in this section Didge.
Don't stoop to the pettiness that you often do.

Didge you've used snopes loads of times.

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:Ben should do something about this site being used to advertize dodgy products, where companies are out to exploit the vunerbale, i find that disgusting

We do have a disclaimer in this section Didge.
Don't stoop to the pettiness that you often do.

I have a disclaimer to Eddie, stop trying to post up bullshit in order for others to exploit the vunerable off their money

As everytime you post this unresearched bullshit, I find you such a destestable person

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t10428-please-read-before-posting-in-this-section

Didge, you find me detestable becasue I post up articles about cancer, you find sassy detestable because of some such shite about Jews, you find Zack detestable becasue he follows a God he wishes to, you find Tommy detestable due to his opnions about gays.....


Who cares?
Seems you're the one with the issues.

eddie wrote:http://www.newsfixboard.com/t10428-please-read-before-posting-in-this-section

Didge, you find me detestable becasue I post up articles about cancer, you find sassy detestable because of some such shite about Jews, you find Zack detestable becasue he follows a God he wishes to, you find Tommy detestable due to his opnions about gays.....


Who cares?
Seems you're the one with the issues.

No I have no problem with scientifc articles on the subject, so again you are yet again being disinginious and why, because you buy into all these remedy bullshit sites, which as seen by the FB page exploit the vunerable and I find that disgusting and then you post up the same beef up gibberish here.

So I care and everytime you post this crap I will continue to expose you for what you are

Rightio Didge. Best keep a lookout

(I might start hiding them round the forum.)

eddie wrote:Rightio Didge. Best keep a lookout

(I might start hiding them round the forum.)

All you need to do is start telling the truth, as not one thing you have claimed on here, that I believe.

How about some just decent honesty. As that would be a good start

Didge wrote:Snopes?



How about a genuine science site please

Heyyyy, you felt it was appropriate to drag a FB site in here as well as a couple of other 'BLOGGER' sites that are NOT "genuine science sites" either, mister. 
I'll stand by my 'factchecking' source, just you never mind.

And while you'll scoff at this interesting information too; it goes directly to the very heart of this entire diatribe that you've built your 'anti-research campaign' attitude about!

Aspirin May Reduce Ovarian Cancer Risk

February 24, 2014 — A daily aspirin may reduce the risk of ovarian cancer, a new study suggests. Further research will be needed to confirm the finding.

That's from the Purdue University research sight; that "May Reduce" wording is also used in the Heart Association verbiage for promoting the daily use of low dose Aspirin {taken daily} to help in reducing the possible heart attacks in people my age! 
So while you carry on with your 'Windmill Crusade - Don Quixote' ...I'll do as 'I' see fit and enjoy reading any and all of the newest data that we {Eddie/Sassy/any other member} brings in here for adult discussion regarding the latest in medical technology and research!

BTW - I can't speak on Eddie's behalf nor Sassy's; but I'll guarantee you that I'm not financially vested in any of these plant based medical research facilities so your whining about making this some 'NEW RULE' is just preposterous and BS ...are you financially vested in those Chemo machines and the Chemo Drugs used to kill cancer cells ??? 
See, how that flip of the coin works?    You can't dictate what's to be allowed for adult discussion; as long as it meets the legal frame work for allowed genre --- WTF?

4EVER2 wrote:

Didge wrote:Snopes?



How about a genuine science site please

Heyyyy, you felt it was appropriate to drag a FB site in here as well as a couple of other 'BLOGGER' sites that are NOT "genuine science sites" either, mister. 
I'll stand by my 'factchecking' source, just you never mind.

And while you'll scoff at this interesting information too; it goes directly to the very heart of this entire diatribe that you've built your 'anti-research campaign' attitude about!

Aspirin May Reduce Ovarian Cancer Risk

February 24, 2014 — A daily aspirin may reduce the risk of ovarian cancer, a new study suggests. Further research will be needed to confirm the finding.

That's from the Purdue University research sight; that "May Reduce" wording is also used in the Heart Association verbiage for promoting the daily use of low dose Aspirin {taken daily} to help in reducing the possible heart attacks in people my age! 
So while you carry on with your 'Windmill Crusade - Don Quixote' ...I'll do as 'I' see fit and enjoy reading any and all of the newest data that we {Eddie/Sassy/any other member} brings in here for adult discussion regarding the latest in medical technology and research!

BTW - I can't speak on Eddie's behalf nor Sassy's; but I'll guarantee you that I'm not financially vested in any of these plant based medical research facilities so your whining about making this some 'NEW RULE' is just preposterous and BS ...are you financially vested in those Chemo machines and the Chemo Drugs used to kill cancer cells ??? 
See, how that flip of the coin works?    You can't dictate what's to be allowed for adult discussion; as long as it meets the legal frame work for allowed genre --- WTF?

So lots of more gibberish about me

Evidence to the claim from Cancer research facilities or anything to back the claims in Eddie's bullshit article out to exploit the vunerable

Zero

Like I said, put up or shut up lol

4EVER2 wrote:Didge = 0 proof just bluster and more bloviating
If you don't like these topics then unchain yourself from that key board and back away from the computer!  Seems you have a 'self-inflicted' issue with what YOU perceive as factual data and that's great - in your world.  
  But you don't get to DICTATE what I get to read or discuss in MY WORLD    TTYL

Still zero evidence to back up the claims in the article even though it made claims from the Cancer Institute

Doh

You can type as big as you like and shout, it just makes you continue to look a wally

Put up or shut up

4EVER2 wrote:Didge = 0 proof just bluster and more bloviating
If you don't like these topics then unchain yourself from that key board and back away from the computer!  Seems you have a 'self-inflicted' issue with what YOU perceive as factual data and that's great - in your world.  
  But you don't get to DICTATE what I get to read or discuss in MY WORLD    TTYL

Put the dummy on ignore, he's not worth using your eyes to read.

sassy wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:Didge = 0 proof just bluster and more bloviating
If you don't like these topics then unchain yourself from that key board and back away from the computer!  Seems you have a 'self-inflicted' issue with what YOU perceive as factual data and that's great - in your world.  
  But you don't get to DICTATE what I get to read or discuss in MY WORLD    TTYL

Put the dummy on ignore, he's not worth using your eyes to read.

So more infantile abuse, first you lie about Major and jump onto this thread and mouth off here as well


Again the Admin team continue to allow you to get away with as how you please

No didge...you are in the wrong....you may post opposing articles and views and dissagree.....you DONT get to dictate "what" a poster may post...you may, if you wish raise a complaint, but I can tell you now that nothing posted in this thread breaches any rules, NOR is it "advertising" anything...

and of course YOU dont get to dictate what someone else does with "their" treatment either. however much that may offend you...

now I suggest you back off a bit and cool down. someone whio disagrees with YOUR pov is NOT somerone to be bludgeoned into submission to YOUR POV......

Lord Foul wrote:No didge...you are in the wrong....you may post opposing articles and views and dissagree.....you DONT get to dictate "what" a poster may post...you may, if you wish raise a complaint, but I can tell you now that nothing posted in this thread breaches any rules, NOR is it "advertising" anything...

and of course YOU dont get to dictate what someone else does with "their" treatment either. however much that may offend you...

now I suggest you back off a bit and cool down. someone whio disagrees with YOUR pov is NOT somerone to be bludgeoned into submission to YOUR POV......

So you back posters posting unfounded remedies that exploit the vunerable?

Good to know

Do not patronize me you twat and I have no need to cool off, just because Eddie is a cry baby

Her views on this disgust me and I have every right to be annoyed at this kind of bullshit

Stop inventing bullshit rules, as I never broke any and I am more disgusted you would defend such bullshit

Have sent you a PM Victor

Okay Apologies to eddie, I know you have your reasons and they are based off good intent, even though I heartedly disgaree with your views on this subject i can understand why you are drawn to such claims. I just hate the fact that many do exploit the vunerable with claims to cures. This article was poor to me and was based on misinformation and I have my reasons why it gets my goat when i read such things, but that is not a reason to have a go at you. We look into things differently, you polace more faith in things not tested where as I place my faith in people themselves where I should at least allow you to express your views on this but we never likely agrre on

So I am sorry for that

It's cool Didge. No worries.

While I think that the Site the OP is from is 'pretty poor' in the information it provides (no mention of active ingredient or volumes consumed or even which animals they tested on )
it is not actually selling anything.

Didge wrote:Okay Apologies to eddie, I know you have your reasons and they are based off good intent, even though I heartedly disgaree with your views on this subject i can understand why you are drawn to such claims. I just hate the fact that many do exploit the vunerable with claims to cures. This article was poor to me and was based on misinformation and I have my reasons why it gets my goat when i read such things, but that is not a reason to have a go at you. We look into things differently, you polace more faith in things not tested where as I place my faith in people themselves where I should at least allow you to express your views on this but we never likely agrre on

So I am sorry for that

Often we care givers are only left with our ability to give hope - fake smiles - false reassurances - and if it might have provided my dying husband a moment of happiness and a brief nanosecond of utopia without the heavy morphine --- if some one had suggested that the mental image of 'ME' climbing up on a stripper pole and doing a vaudeville routine for him, well ...I'd have put a stripper pole in our bedroom and given him a nightly show! 

We - the care givers to our dying cancer loved ones{family/friends} will leave NO STONE UNTURNED in our rational to find something/anything that provides some form of comfort; even if it's just a placebo and not worthy according to your standards - it's what WE DO.   

But it warms my heart to see you finally acquiesce to this and apologize to Eddie for your over reaction; we all have our PASSIONS but this - this isn't one to judge others about.

In the U.S. (and across the West, more generally), we are understandably suspicious of medical hoaxes and scams, given the damage they can cause. Our media and pundits try to weed out medical assertions unsupported by science. The Internet, in particular, abounds with dubious products whose untested, often wildly oversold effects can easily persuade the unthinking and the credulous to part with their cash.
Yet as someone who follows and comments on developments in especially psychiatry, I frequently am struck by the faith we place in products that come with FDA approval, but a litany of unpleasant, sometimes risky side effects. When, for example, millions of men across America are willing to "double their risk of hearing loss" and jeopardize their eyesight for an erection, as recent studies warn about those routinely taking Viagra, you know that potency is something we take very seriously. Enough to tune out such warnings and opt unthinkingly for a blue pill, rather than a wealth of natural aphrodisiacs whose effect is basically identical—minus, of course, the nasty health risks.
When our knowledge of natural products is also limited, even impoverished, by cultural biases that skew toward pharmaceuticals, our information-base shrinks accordingly. We ignore the well-known medicinal properties of vast amounts of natural products and end up placing enormous faith in pills whose very advertisements are forced to devote significant amounts of time and space to a laundry list of side effects. (The U.S. shares with New Zealand the dubious distinction of being the only Western countries to allow direct-to-consumer advertising of psychotropic pharmaceuticals.)
Because I also spend large amounts of time in South America, in particular Peru, from where I'm blogging this summer, cultural differences in medicine and public health can be especially striking. From here, over the last few weeks, I've been able to follow with intense interest the arguments both for and against naturally existing cancer-fighting agents, such as the leaves of the guanabana tree (hereafter known as "graviola"). From all that I've been able to investigate, from PubMed to the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, my sense is that the leaves of this remarkably promising fruit should be getting more rather than less attention from the scientific community. As the studies below indicate, there is already strong evidence that acetogenins in the plant’s leaves target tumors in what scientists call “apoptosis,” or programmed cell death. Unlike in chemotherapy, however, that targeting, according to Zeng et al (1996b), is “relatively nontoxic to noncancerous cells.” In Peru, graviola is routinely part of a cancer-fighting arsenal, along with chemotherapy. In the States the latter prevails, eclipsing most other options.

Source: Wiki Commons
First, some key background. About three years ago, word spread rapidly on the web about the cancer-fighting properties of "graviola," the leaves of the guanabana tree (Annona muricata), also known as "soursop," "cherimoya," "custard apple," and "Brazilian paw paw." The tree grows in Peru, Colombia, and Brazil, as well as countries in sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia with similarly temperate climates. In all of these countries, the fruit is eaten widely; it is often put in shakes and fruit salads, because it is so delicious. Additionally, the leaves and fruit are frequently used to treat viruses, infections, and depression. There is also, apparently, limited production of the fruit in southern Florida.
As millions of people suffer from all kinds of cancers, for which we have treatments such as radiation and chemotherapy (generally, with terrible side effects) but no cure, interest in and demand for graviola, in particular, skyrocketed around 2008 when reports of its efficacy started to rise. At the same time, some small businesses and a few hucksters, generally selling graviola with a host of other products (essiac tea, burdock root, sheep sorrel, blue-green algae, and so on), overstated their medicinal effects, whose accuracy had also been exaggerated in all the hubbub and excitement. Very quickly, a treatment known to kill some cancer cells and tumors (see below) morphed inaccurately into assurance about cancer's cure.
As rapidly as excitement had skyrocketed, skeptics rushed to denounce the "cancer cure" as a fraud and scam afflicting the needy, the desperate, and the gullible. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) swooped in to fine and close various businesses that had unwisely reported an ability to cure cancer. And in September 2008, Medical News Today publicized the FTC's actions, quoting its director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, Lydia Parkes, as saying: "There is no credible scientific evidence that any of the products marketed by these companies can prevent, cure, or treat cancer of any kind" (my emphases).
The only problem with Parkes's blanket dismissal of all these elements is that, in the case of graviola at least, her claim wasn't in fact true.
In 1976, as Richard D. McCarthy, MD, reports on the encyclopedic cancer website U.S. Cancer Centers: Cancer Center Information and Research, "The NCI or the National Cancer Institute did some research on the guanabana cancer cure [sic] and came up with some interesting results. The study . . . showed that the leaves and stems of the plant were incredibly efficient at destroying certain cancerous cells in the body."
"Inexplicably," another site notes, "the results [of the NCI research] were published in an internal report and never released to the public. Since 1976, guanabana has proven to be an immensely potent cancer killer in 20 independent laboratory tests, but as of now, no double-blind clinical trials. [However], a study published in the Journal of Natural Products, following a recent study conducted at Catholic University of South Korea, stated that one chemical in guanabana was found to selectively kill colon cancer cells at '10,000 times the potency of (the commonly used chemotherapy drug) Adriamycin. '... The most significant part of the Catholic University of South Korea report is that guanabana was shown to selectively target the cancer cells, leaving healthy cells untouched."
Adds the same site, "A study at Purdue University, Indiana, recently found that leaves from the guanabana tree killed cancer cells among six human cell lines and were especially effective against prostate, pancreatic and lung cancers." The article, "Paw Paw and Cancer: Annonaceous Acetogenins from Discovery to Commercial Products," appearing in Journal of Natural Products 71.7 in 2008, was authored by Dr. Jerry L. McLaughlin of Purdue's Department of Medicinal Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology. The journal is published by the American Chemical Society and American Society of Pharmacognosy.

Source: Wiki Commons
In response to the predictably enormous rise in public interest in graviola, Cancer Research UK also released a statement about the alleged cancer "cure" that included these sentences:
"In laboratory studies, graviola extracts can kill some types of liver and breast cancer cells that are resistant to particular chemotherapy drugs. But there haven't been any large-scale studies in humans. So we don't know yet whether it can work as a cancer treatment or not. Overall, there is no evidence to show that graviola works as a cure for cancer."
On the basis of the laboratory studies quoted here, with Cancer Research UK acknowledging that "graviola extracts can kill some types of liver and breast cancer cells," you might think that such preliminary but hopeful results would at least warrant further investigation. As the site states, "we don't know yet," implying a desire for further research, but also essentially acknowledging ignorance because of the rather astonishing absence of "large-scale studies in humans."
In the United States, the FTC's action overrode the initial findings of the National Cancer Institute. Even more puzzling, the NCI, after establishing those findings, decided against publicizing them and, for reasons unclear to me, against pursuing them further.
Here in Peru, by contrast, the leaves of the guanabana tree—in short, the very parts of it that both the NCI and CR determined do in fact have cancer-fighting properties—are widely considered part of a parallel set of treatments against cancer, along with chemotherapy and the removal of tumors through operations. In the case of one woman I interviewed, the former mayor of a small town (Supe) three hours north of Lima, graviola was noted by her doctor both for helping to kill cancer cells and for greatly boosting the immune system, itself a common victim of chemo, which destroys more than just cancer cells. In both cases, science supports his recommendation.
After an operation to remove a cancerous tumor in one of her ovaries, the woman (whose information I am relaying with her permission) was given a combined treatment of chemotherapy and a dietary supplement of graviola, taken with meals three times a day. (It's taken either in capsule form or as a tea with boiling water; in either case, that should always be in consultation with a doctor or oncologist). One year later, after she had battled intense side effects from chemo—including hairloss, skin damage, and nausea—she wasn't just in remission. Her cancer had completely disappeared. It remains gone to this day, two years later.
Although it is impossible in this case to distinguish clearly where the effects of chemo ended and those of graviola began, a carefully administered large-scale human trial could control for that variable. My point, then, is not to state or even imply that graviola is a "cure" for cancer. Following the science, I am instead urging that the States and other countries fund and advance such research, owing precisely to the initial findings of the National Cancer Institute and, more recently, of Purdue's Cancer Center.
In Peru, to point up the differences and give readers more information, a major chain, Bionaturista, with stores across the capital and surrounding country, grinds the guanabana leaves into powder under laboratory conditions, with all equipment carefully sterilized, and exports it to a client-base around the world. The chain is one of Peru's largest exporters—not bad for a country whose enviable economic boom is owing partly to its vast natural reserves of minerals and natural gas.
Nor, I should add, is graviola alone among natural products in having anticancer properties. In 2006, to cite Wikipedia, "a research team from the Ben Gurion University in Israel found that lemongrass (Cymbopogon citratus) also caused apoptosis (programmed cell death) in cancer cells." A key ingredient in especially Thai and Vietnamese cuisine, lemongrass—which is widely and inexpensively available across South-East Asia, South America, and in certain Western stores and supermarkets—is also routinely used as a delicious, healthful tea. According to the published studies below, its potency in killing cancer cells is dwarfed by that of graviola.
In urging that a lot more funding and research go into investigating why graviola kills certain kinds of malignant cancer cells, apparently I risk the ire of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. But rather than give a blanket dismissal of graviola and guanabana, perhaps the FTC should heed the findings of both the NCI and Cancer Research UK and look into this further. The health of millions of cancer sufferers and survivors around the world quite clearly depends on it.
christopherlane.org  Follow me on Twitter: @christophlane
Further References:
Chang, F.R., and Y.C. Wu, "Novel Cytotoxic Annonaceous Acetogenins from Annona muricata." J. Nat. Prod. 64.7 (2001): 925-931: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11473425
McLaughlin, J.L., "Paw Paw and Cancer: Annonaceous Acetogenins from Discovery to Commercial Products." J. Nat. Prod. 71.7 (2008): 1311-21: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18598079: “The extract (in capsule form) enhances a mixture of natural anthelmintics. In addition, an encapsulated extract has been effectively used by certain cancer patients as a botanical supplement product.”
Oberliesa, N. H., J. L. Jonesb, T. H. Corbettb, S. S. Fotopoulosc, and J. L. McLaughlin, "Tumor cell growth inhibition by several Annonaceous acetogenins in an in vitro disk diffusion assay," Cancer Letters 96:1 (September 4, 1995), 55-62: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7553608: "The cell inhibition activities of several Annonaceous acetogenins, covering the three major structural classes of bis-adjacent, bis-non-adjacent, and single tetrahydrofuran (THF) ring compounds and their respective ketolactone rearrangement products, were tested in an in vitro disk diffusion assay against three murine (P388, PO3, and M17/Adr) and two human (H8 and H125) cancerous cell lines as well as a non-cancerous immortalized rat GI epithelial cell line (I18). The results demonstrate a dose-dependent inhibition of cancerous cell growth, while non-cancerous cell growth is not inhibited by the same dosages. All of the acetogenins, irrespective of their various structural types, inhibit the growth of adriamycin resistant tumor cells and non-resistant tumor cells at the same levels of potency. These results show that the Annonaceous acetogenins are an extremely potent class of compounds, and their inhibition of cell growth can be selective for cancerous cells and also effective for drug resistant cancer cells, while exhibiting only minimal toxicity to 'normal' non-cancerous cells" (my emphases).
Pomper, K.W., Lowe, J.D., Crabtree, S.B., and Keller W. “Identification of annonaceous acetogenins in the ripe fruit of the North American pawpaw (Asimina triloba ).” J. Agric Food Chem. 2009 Sep 23; 57(18):8339-43: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19711911: “This plant contains annonaceous acetogenins in the twigs, unripe fruit, seeds, roots, and bark tissues, which display antitumor, pesticidal, antimalarial, anthelmintic, piscicidal, antiviral, and antimicrobial effects, suggesting many potentially useful applications.”
Rupprecht J.K., Hui Y.H., McLaughlin J.L. “Annonaceous acetogenins: A Review.” J. Nat Prod. 53.2 (1990):237-78: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2199608
Zeng, L., Q. Ye, N.H. Oberlies, G. Shi, Z-M. Gu, K. He, and J.L. McGaughlin, "Recent Advances in Annonaceous Acetogenins." NPR: Natural Product Reports 13.4 (1996): 275-306: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8760865
Zeng, L., F.-E. Wu, N.H. Oberlies, J.L. McLaughlin, and S. Sastrodihadjo, "Five New Monotetrahydrofuran Ring Acetogenins from the Leaves of Annona muricata," J. Nat. Prod. 59.11 (1996): 1035–42: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8946744: "The high potencies of the Annonaceous acetogenins in various bioassay systems have been demonstrated experimentally to be due to their inhibition of ATP production through both the inhibition of the NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase (Complex I) of mitochondrial electron transport systems and the ubiquinone-linked NADH oxidase in the plasma membranes of tumor cells. These combined actions may be linked to programmed cell death (apoptosis). The acetogenins are effective against drug resistant cell lines, and they are relatively nontoxic to noncancerous cells" (my emphasis).




Christopher Lane, Ph.D., has won a Prescrire Prize for Medical Writing and teaches at Northwestern University

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/side-effects/201107/fighting-cancer-science-and-nature


There is a follow on article that disagrees, such is the way with these articles

Heartfelt post 4ever.


@sassy thanks for that. As you say, there are so many contradictory articles, but as long as you discuss remedies and alternative meds with your oncologist, I don't see the harm.
Lisa's doctor told her she can try whatever she likes - he makes a note of amounts etc that she takes - and he said as long as he's in the loop he's very much a believer in alternatives alongside chemo.

There's also Curcumin - an extract of the turmeric root - and there's plenty of info on the cancer research page about that.