Wow, there is so much wrong with your post I don't know where to begin. How about this, the article you quoted is from a website that SELLS LAETRILE!!! Yeah, that's a unbiased source for sure.
And this: "Naturopathic physicians who have studied the medical pathology of the patients included in the study, and manner in which Dr. Moertel conducted the study, believe Moertel was biased ..."
Of course they would, because his study shows that everything they promote just doesn't work.
"First of all "The National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored an independent study of Laetrile with cancer patients" and that alone, should ring alarms bells!"
So, the National Cancer Institute really doesn't want to help people with cancer? I see.
"In fact, I can prove they are misleading you on many of their claims."
Where were we mislead?
"Dr. Charles G. Moertel described a clinical trial involving 178 patients. Patients were selected who had histologically proven cancer for which no standard treatment was known to be curative or to extend life expectancy. All patients had had no surgery, radiation therapy or chemotherapy for one month. The amygdalin used for treatment was prepared from apricot pits and supplied by the Pharmaceutical Resources Branch of the National Cancer Institute.
Patients selected were in good general condition, were ambulatory and able to maintain good nutrition. Patients who were disabled and bedridden were ineligible for the study."
Of course you don't take people who have a good chance for success with known drugs and put them on experimental compounds with no solid proof of efficacy, that's just good science. There was no deception, and the end result was that laetrile didn't help. Face the facts.
"The NCI admits that the patients selected for the NCCTG study were all terminal, and that none of them had ever received chemotherapy or had endured any surgery to remove tumors. "
Well according to your first website that's the best kind of cancer for laetrile to work on: "These hospitals achieve nearly a 100% recovery rate with virgin cases (localised tumours/cancers that have not yet been burned up with radiation, poisoned with chemotherapy, or cut into with surgery)."
http://www.worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/introduction.html
Funny how one of your sources claims standard treatment seems to interfere with laetrile's magic and the other source says the study on laetrile wasn't fair because they didn't try standard treatment first.
Now lets look at your conspiracy theory, that large drug companies would lose millions if a cheap cure for cancer were found. What about insurance companies, that spend millions on expensive cancer treatments? And how about the federal government that also spends millions on cancer treatments for people on government assistance? I guess the insurance companies and the government are willing to suppress these natural cancer treatments and lose billions of dollars so the drug companies can make money? Riiiight.
You are very naive my friend.