Talk:Apricot kernel

message: The entire issue of Laetrile is more appropriate for the Amygdalin page, and has been dealt with there by others previous to my edits of this evening.
It appears that a few years have gone by since this was last disputed here. My read of the material on Laetrile this evening is that it is no longer held to be controversial, but is now generally considered as having been proven both ineffective and harmful. If anyone wishes to make claims on the motivation of FDA "to protect pharmaceutical profits" in banning it (rather than because it metabolizes to cyanide), you will need to include some significant substantiation for such an extreme claim. --BrucePerens (talk) 09:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Laetrile

message: I can't see that this article justifies an NPOV tag since there is no evidence of an NPOV dispute. I have tried to change it to reflect both the facts (the scientific community doesn't regard Laetrile as a vitamin) and the beliefs (people "who still eat a traditional diet have been found to be largely free from cancer" - find a citation for that and I'll remove the "citation needed" tag).
If anyone believes that the neutrality is still in dispute, please say so here and we can try and change the article to present all points of view. If nobody disputes the neutrality then I will remove the NPOV tag. Phaedrus86 06:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Silence. I will remove the tag. Phaedrus86 03:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV tag

message: The only citation for this section is for some unsourced material on a dehydrated food vendor's web site. This is not a credible source. If no better sources are supplied then I will remove this section, per Wikipedia:Verifiability. Phaedrus86 10:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sir Robert McCarrison 

message: tNot all apricot kernels are strongly bitter. I believe only the bitter ones contain high levels of cyanide. When I was a child we used to eat a lot of apricot kernels. We would break the seeds ourselves and before eating would taste a small piece of each one, discarding the bitter ones. From memory about 20% were bitter. Recently I bought a 250g pack of commercially produced kernels, not one was strong tasting or bitter - I'm not sure how they achieve that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.154.53.138 (talk) 03:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on the cultivar of apricot.  Some have been selectively bred to get rid of the bitterness, and consequently the amygdalin content in the seeds is low.  The same thing is true of almonds. — QuicksilverT @ 21:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strong-tasting and bitter 

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 20:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: I thought that the high levels of cyanide exist in Bitter Kernels, whereas the Sweet Kernels have lower levels.  Maybe there could be some information addressing this. It currently looks as if all kernels are toxic. Generalhoneypot (talk) 09:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference between sweet and bitter kernels 

message: Hi I thought I would quote here to clarify for those in doubt that the material above is absolute nonsense and not to be trusted. I don't know how someone can pint this garbage with no references. If they purport to know about cyanide they should also know full well it in this case is locked up in a molecular structure that can't harm us. Apricot seeds/kernels have been eaten without harm for thousands of years. Just as in any other healthy food earth provides, someone doesn't want you to have it because they don't own the patent for it and it might cure you.
Taken from: https://www.facebook.com/ENDPROSTATECANCER/posts/438054846241413   
..."Amagdylin contains four substances. Two are glucose; one is benzaldehyde, and one is cyanide. Yes, cyanide and benzaldehyde are poisons if they are released or freed as pure molecules and not bound within other molecular formations. Many foods containing cyanide are safe because the cyanide remains bound and locked as part of another molecule and therefore cannot cause harm.
There is even an enzyme in normal cells to catch any free cyanide molecules and to render them harmless by combining them with sulfur. That enzyme is rhodanese, which catalyzes the reaction and binds any free cyanide to sulfur. By binding the cyanide to sulfur, it is converted to a cyanate which is a neutral substance. Then it is easily passed through the urine with no harm to the normal cells.
But cancer cells are not normal. They contain an enzyme that other cells do not share, beta-glucosidase. This enzyme, virtually exclusive to cancer cells, is considered the “unlocking enzyme” for amagdylin molecules. It releases both the benzaldehyde and the cyanide, creating a toxic synergy beyond their uncombined sum. This is what the cancer cell’s beta-glucosidase enzyme does to self destruct cancer cells."— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.0.179 (talk) 17:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Absolute nonsense 

message: "Calories from fat = 100%, Cholesterol -= 0"...? This is simply ridiculous: how MANY calories? What minerals, what vitamins? 
There is more - much, much more - to apricot pits than cyanide, you know.
***  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.176.213.73 (talk) 13:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are the nutritional values? 

message: Feel free to add a section about the discredited vitamin b17 hypothesis. I removed the mention because, as it currently was phrased, it could lead people to think that amygdalin is actually a vitamin or is seriously referred to as such. 2603:7081:1603:A300:3500:937A:B7D4:EA35 (talk) 00:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. There is no recognition of a "vitamin B17" by any reputable agency. Zefr (talk) 01:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed "vitamin B17" bit.