Critiquing the Critics on Orac’s Respectful Insolence blog: Part II

Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/03/14/five-things-i-learned-second-hand-from-the-recent-screening-of-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-2

#21 – Denice Walter – March 14

“And him of the international recognition he so truly deserves”

Do you mean like THESE ?

HONORS AND AWARDS

LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD. March 2012. Dallas /Ft. Worth, TX

The Order of Merit of the President of Poland – Officer’s Cross, October, 2004

Decoration of Polish Medical Association, November, 2001

The Order of Saint Brigida – Grand Cross with Star, November, 2001

The Order of Saint Stanislas – Grand Cross with Star, November, 2000

The Order of Reconciliation – Noember, 2000

The Cross Virtus Nobilitat, June, 1999

The Wisdom Award of Honor, December, 1998

The Medal of the President of City of Lublin, Poland, December, 1998

The Order of Saint Stanislas- Commander’s Cross with Star, December, 1997

The Lady Liberty Award “for engaging in invigorating the Right to be Secure in their Effects by fourteen years of perseverance in practicing his Profession free of interference by a government having no probable cause and in the determined resistance to that interference,” Libertarian Party of Texas, Dallas, TX, July, 1997

The Gold Medal from the American Institute of Polish Culture for outstanding achievements in the field of medicine and discovery of anti-cancer drugs antineoplastons, Miami, FL, February, 1997

The Medal “Heart for Hearts” for saving human lives, Lublin, Poland, August, 1997

The Memorial Medal of Zamoyski’s Lyceum in appreciation of outstanding contribution to increase scientific ranking of the school, Lublin, Poland, November, 1997

The Heritage Award by Polish American Congress in recognition of extraordinary achievement in the research, treatment, and prevention of cancer, Chicago, IL, October, 1993

Special Medal from the Polish government’s Institute for Drug Research and Control for achievement in the field of cancer research, Bialvstok, Poland, September, 1989

Honorable Membership in the Academia del Medeterraneo, Rome, Italy, 1984

Recipient of commendation for Dedicated Service and for Personal Contribution made in the
Advancement of Medical Education, Research and Health Care, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, April, 1977

Recipient of Medical Doctor Diploma with Distinction, Medical Academy, Lublin, Poland, 1967

Co-winner of the prize for best paper presented at the 7th Conference of Polish Medical Student Research
Societies, Poanan, Poland, 1966

The Hereditary Title of Count

#22 – Adam – March 14

“Even if the FDA were the devil incarnate what’s to stop Burzynski publishing his high quality data on his own website, or submitting it to some publication outside of the FDA’s cloven hooved jurisdiction?

The FDA & “big pharma” just make for a convenient excuse when the reason for the lack of evidence is more straightforward – there is no good quality evidence that ANPs work

Pretend there is a conspiracy to “suppress” the evidence and use that as an excuse to never provide any”

Just proves that if you don’t have something to complain about, you will make something up

He is already in the process of attempting to be published, but that is NOT good enough for you because you now want him to publish on his web-site

#23 – a-non – March 14

Burzynski isn’t interested in real scientific discussion of his treatments

The claims that he can’t “publish” is just a smokescreen, an excuse to explain away the reason he isn’t in Phase III trails or doesn’t have strong peer-reviewed studies showing his work

The excuse Big Medicine is bent against him is good enough to explain away the lack of published studies to the audience he’s trying to reach

Burzynski doesn’t care about impressing skeptics or the medical establishment

He just wants the desperate cancer patient to buy his product – it’s a really a variation of the high-pressure car salesman who doesn’t want you to read the fine print or do a thorough examination of the automobile”

And you are just another example of someone who has NOT read:

2/24/2013

http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=1442

2/27/2013

http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=1798

3/9/2013

http://www.thetwentyfirstfloor.com/?p=8001

#24 – elburto – March 14

The usual false equivalencies I see?

Two points of note:

1. WRT the reading of scans. Nobody’s perfect, nobody has a 100% hit rate

However, the pattern in Burzynski’s case points to either extreme visual impairment/total incompetence at best, and active deceit at worst

This isn’t “One or two diagnostic errors” so much as “Every patient is given an apparently scripted speech about cyst formation and tumour breakdown”

Seriously

Read the case files at TOBPG

2. Cost

If the entire World used the US system you may have a hint of a point WRT equivalent costs between woo and medicine

As you apparently keep failing to grasp, that’s not the case. UK children, in particular, receive free oncological care at treatment centres at the cutting edge of paediatric cancers. So £0 vs £150k of lies and false hope isn’t such a bargain, especially considering the increased pain and trauma (emotional and physical) associated with ANP “treatment””

seriously ? Seriously ?? SERIOUSLY ???

You want people to access a patient web-site but on the other hand, critics complain that the pro-Burzynski web-site is not reliable

I will believe your cost claims once you start reading articles like these and comparing the costs:

Cost cancer

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-16/politics/health.care.hearing_1_health-insurance-post-claims-underwriting-individual-health?_s=PM:POLITICS

2008 – Cost cancer insurance
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/health/06avastin.html?_r=0

Cost cancer chemo up-front

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120934207044648511.html?mod=2_1566_topbox#articleTabs%3Darticle

#25 – a-non – March 14

Moreover, if the costs of the treatments were the same, or even if conventional treatment was somewhat more expensive, the cost/benefit analysis would almost certainly sway towards the conventional…because there’s actual scientific evidence that shows that those treatments work – maybe not as well as we’d like, and with known side effects

If I’m being unbelievably generous, the best I can say about Burzynski’s treatment is that there’s a chance it might be effective

Seems like if I had $200K to spend, I’d go with the surer thing”

THESE costs ?

3/2012

http://www.avalerehealth.net/news/2012-04-03_COA/Cost_of_Care.pdf

CHEMOTHERAPY:
9/24/2012

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/09/24/3549634/prices-soar-as-hospitals-dominate.html

5/14/2012

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-05-14/national/35457286_1_lung-cancer-drug-drugs-work-multiple-myeloma-patients

RADIATION:
1/4/2013

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2013/01/13370/how-prostate-cancer-therapies-compare-cost-and-effectiveness

3/15/2012

http://www.ascopost.com/issues/march-15-2012/rising-costs-in-radiation-oncology-linked-to-medicare-coverage.aspx

http://cancer.disease.com/Treatment/Radiation-Therapy

#27 – John H – March 14

“According to Wikipedia:

The Skeptics was a New Zealand postpunk band from 1979 to 1990

They became notorious in 1987 for an unusually graphic music video entitled “AFFCO”

Why is Mercola so wound up about them?

They broke up long ago”

The difference is, THEY actually did something that people wanted to see

#28 – Edith Prikley – March 14

Indeed. In fact, what’s stopping Scammyslaw from publishing it himself?

He’s got a website

He’s rich enough to found his own medical journal if he wanted to

Given what a publicity hound Scamley is, it’s hard to see how he could resist trumpeting his brilliant success to the world

Unless, of course, he has something to hide….(dun dun dunnnnn….”

Maybe you should change that to:

Dumb dumb dumb….

Since it seems like you have NOT read the 3 links provided above under #23

Also, you still live in a fantasy world where you have no idea how much money Burzynski has or does NOT have

#29 – Narad – March 14

prefacing his question with the observation that Merola accused all of us of being funded by pharma, asked him about how he has funded his movies, Merola reportedly looked none too pleased”

I can understand why he might have “looked none too pleased,” if the questioner could NOT bother to read:

About the Director – Eric Merola

http://www.burzynskimovie.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=64

“maxed out his credit cards”

“Against all odds, he managed to direct and produce the story of Dr. Burzynski and his patients—without a dime of outside funding”

“Issue the warrants, put out the promotional piece, wait for the stock price to rise, and get right out

Rinse, lather, repeat”

And here we have another critic who does NOT understand:

The United States Supreme Court has stated that:

“The legal right of an individual to decrease the amount of what would otherwise be his taxes or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted.”

Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935)

#33 – Sadie Burke – March 14

Do you have data regarding his success in brain cancer?

The narratives that families share regarding patients’ survival aren’t data

I can, however, show you published data on survival rates for children with brain cancer that comes from actual research facilities like St. Jude

(Who, y’know, doesn’t ask families to pay out-of-pocket for medical expenses.)”

Good ol’ St. Jude:

http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=403c6f9523e70110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD

CEO – $742,718

http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

Tax-Exempt
Receives Federal Grants / Funds

http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=b7e79bb8a0cf5110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD&cpsextcurrchannel=1

2/15/2012
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has awarded St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital $4,314,800 for a childhood cancer survivor study

The new federal funds will be distributed by the National Cancer Institute (NCI)

http://cohen.house.gov/press-release/cohen-st-jude-receive-43-million-childhood-cancer-survivor-study

Burzynski does NOT receive Federal Grants / Funds

2003

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12718563

recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma
Phase 2
phase II
antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1

6 months median duration of treatment

of all 12 patients
2 years / 33.3% – Survival
2 / 17% – alive and tumour free for over 5 years since initial diagnosis

from the start of treatment
5 years – 1 alive for more than
4 years – 1 alive for more than

Only mild and moderate toxicities were observed, which included

3 cases of skin allergy

2 cases of:
anaemia
fever
hypernatraemuia

single cases of:
agranulocytosis
hypoglycaemia
numbness
tiredness
myalgia
vomiting

2003
Protocol – recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma
12 – Patients Accrued
10 – Evaluable Patients
2 / 20% – # and % of Patients Showing Complete Response
3 / 30% – # and % of Patients Showing Partial Response
3 / 30% – # and % of Patients Showing Stable Disease
2 / 20% – # and % of Patients Showing Progressive Disease

2006

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16484713

Brainstem glioma carries the worst prognosis of all malignancies of the brain

Most patients with brainstem glioma fail standard radiation therapy and chemotherapy and do not survive longer than 2 years

Treatment is even more challenging when an inoperable tumor is of high-grade pathology (HBSG)

patients with HBSG treated with antineoplastons in 4 phase 2 trials

18 – evaluable
4 – glioblastomas
14 – anaplastic HBSG

14 – diffuse intrinsic tumors
12 – recurrence
6 – did not have radiation therapy or chemotherapy

Antineoplastons, A10 (A10I) and AS2-1 injections

5 months median duration

Responses were assessed by gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography

39% – overall survival at 2 years
22% – overall survival at 5 years

17+ years maximum survival for a patient with anaplastic astrocytoma

5+ years for a patient with glioblastoma

39% – Progression-free survival at 6 months

Antineoplastons tolerated very well
1 case of grade 4 toxicity (reversible anemia)

5+ year survival in recurrent diffuse intrinsic glioblastomas and anaplastic astrocytomas of the brainstem in a small group of patients

2006
Protocol – high-grade pathology (HBSG)
– Patients Accrued
18 – Evaluable Patients
11% – # and % of Patients Showing Complete Response
11% – # and % of Patients Showing Partial Response
39% – # and % of Patients Showing Stable Disease
39% – # and % of Patients Showing Progressive Disease

About these ads

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s