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

Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II

#2 – JackM – March 14

“You’re a cancer surgeon who just blogged a 15 page “movie review””

#3 – Mark McA – March 14

“Never understood why Burzliebers don’t question the ‘suppressed research’ gambit

As tho Burz has no possible way to publish his 35 years of what must be conclusive data

You know, like On The Internet For All To See”

This critic obviously did 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

#5 – elburto – March 14

“Nice work by Skeptic Mule Brian, especially the question about funding”
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/2050-qburzynski-iiq-is-more-of-the-same.html

If you think THAT was “Nice work,” you obviously did NOT read THIS:

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”

How difficult would it have been for Brian Thompson (James Randi Educational Foundation – jref) to find this ?

And the critic continues:

“WRT the Evil! Big! Pharma! rushed-through and deadly drugs of dangerousness, Temodar and Avastin, Count Stan can’t be too opposed to their existence”

Another critic other than Orac who could NOT find:

Temodar:
http://www.pharmainfo.net/fda-articles/fda-safety-page-fatal-medication-errors-associated-temodar

http://www.drugcite.com/?q=TEMODAR

http://www.adverseevents.com/drugdetail.php?AEDrugID=1794&BrandName=TEMODAR

“I’m sure they’ve featured in his close your eyes and pick the names of four chemotherapeutic agents out of a hat PGTCT regimens”

The critic does what critics do best:

“SPECULATE”

“So the vast amounts of moolah he charges for his pick’n’mix blastathon would make him a pharma shill, no?”

You do know FDA required ?

” … in 1997, his medical practice was expanded to include traditional cancer treatment options such as

chemotherapy,

gene targeted therapy,

immunotherapy and

hormonal therapy

in response to FDA requirements that cancer patients utilize more traditional cancer treatment options in order to be eligible to participate in the Company’s

Antineoplaston CLINICAL TRIALS
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/724445/000091205702038660/a2091272z10qsb.txt

#6 – Bob G Los Angeles – March 14

“I seriously doubt that the true believers are likely to be cured of their ailment, but I think it’s useful to offer the counter-arguments so that more or less normal people who don’t happen to have medical training will at least be exposed to the more reason based positions

I agree that it’s a horrible thing when deluded parents cause their children with treatable conditions to die (or to die painfully and prematurely

We don’t seem to have solved this question yet as a civilization”

Maybe this is another critic who thinks that all Burzynski’s successes are due to:

Immunity over inability:

The spontaneous regression of cancer
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3312698
J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2011 Jan-Jun; 2(1): 43–49.
doi: 10.4103/0976-9668.82318
PMCID: PMC3312698

Maybe they should look at THIS:

#7 My 1st-hand Review of Orac’s 2nd-Hand Review – Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog

March 14, 2013
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/my-1st-hand-review-of-oracs-2nd-hand-review-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii
[…]
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/03/14/five-things-i-learned-second-hand-from-the-recent-scree…
[…]

#9 – Graham – March 14

“Cancer quacks should in my opinion be held fully responsible for the misery they cause

Those who support them Merola, Mercola & Oz, et al should be held fully responsible for this misery as they are the ones who are really laughing at the deaths of the cancer patients they steer to parasites like Burzynski”

Yeah, chemotherapy and radiation and radiotherapy NEVER caused the death of anyone, I’m sure

#12 – Science Mom – March 14

“I suspect Merola didn’t name names because he made potentially libellous statements about Burzyski’s detractors”

Maybe you shouldn’t “count your chickens before they hatch”

There is a web-site where documents show up related to the movie:
http://www.burzynskimovie.com

“Riiiight

Which is exactly why they have to churn out infomercials, send sleazy attack Shih tzus after Burzynski critics, and whine about all of their persecution whilst refusing to publish studies

Interesting definition of winning”

Do you really want to see who engages in adolescent name-calling, misinformation, disinformation, and misdirection like:

“trolls,” “spammers,” “disingenuous,” “dishonest,” “profoundly dishonest,” “sheer stubborn stupid,” “stupid,” “spambot,” “fools,” “shills, “conman”

Burzynski critics ?
https://www.facebook.com/questions/488444654552853/?refid=17

#16 – Eric Lund – March 14

“The trackback at #7, by the way, is from a site called”

“stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com”

“So I’d say Orac’s needling is getting to Burzynski, or at least his minions”

Laughable, considering Orac’s and some other Critic’s inability to “Fact-Check”

#17 – Krebiozen – March 14

“Eric Lund,

The trackback at #7, by the way, is from a site called”

“stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com”

“That’s the blog belonging to DJT, or Squidymus as I prefer to call him, on account of his habit of emitting great clouds of irrelevant verbiage in an attempt to hide his cluelessness when under threat

His incoherence appears to be evolving into even more complete illegibility, if that is possible”

Posts the person who can wend their way through Orac’s “15 page movie review,” but whines about my review of a substantially less amount of pages

#19 – Mu – March 14

“The odd part is, even after 30 years or so of ANP therapy there doesn’t seem to be (or otherwise he/she would surely been in the movie) any patient who was actually cured and is still alive after a significant time

All the people mentioned are either dead or still undergoing treatment with varying success”

I guess I could ignore THESE like you:
2004 – Phase II

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15563234
incurable recurrent and progressive multicentric glioma

Drugs R D. 2004;5(6):315-26

10 patients are alive and well from 2 to >14 years post-diagnosis

2005 – Phase II
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15911929
13 children with recurrent disease or high risk

Integr Cancer Ther. 2005 Jun;4(2):168-77

6 (46%) survived more than 5 years

2006
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16484713
patients with inoperable tumor of high-grade pathology (HBSG) treated with antineoplastons in 4 phase 2 trials

Integr Cancer Ther. 2006 Mar;5(1):40-7

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

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

#20 – Ren – March 14

“Wait one minute!

On the one hand, Burzinski can’t/won’t publish because everyone from the government on down is blocking him

On the other, some oncologist in Japan can and will publish?

Which is it?

Either the results get published or they don’t

Why won’t the Japanese researcher just publish Burzinski’s data?

I’m confused

It may be too early for me”

It is too early for you

But you can always read the 3 links I provided above at #3, and THESE:

Randomized Phase II Study of Hepatic Arterial Infusion with or without Antineoplastons as Adjuvant Therapy after Hepatectomy for liver Metastases from Colorectal Cancer

Annals of Oncology 2010;21:viii221
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/8774.pdf

http://oncologypro.esmo.org/meeting-resources/meeting-abstracts/european-society-for-medical-oncology-esmo-2010/randomized-phase-ii-study-of-hepatic-ar-3558.aspx

http://abstracts.webges.com/viewing/view.php?congress=esmo2010&congress_id=296&publication_id=3558

11. Antineoplaston Therapy Doubles 5-Year Survival Rate Following Curative Resection of Hepatic Mets

(May 27/09)

Positive results were borne from a phase II clinical study of Antineoplaston therapy (ANP therapy) in metastatic colon cancer following curative resection of liver mets

The study was performed in Japan

The study consisted of 65 colon cancer patients who had undergone curative resection of their liver mets and were randomized to one of the following groups:

1. intrahepatic infusion of 5FU

2. intrahepatic infusion of 5FU plus IV ANP therapy given (a) daily for seven days following hepatic
resection, and (b) ANP therapy given orally daily for one year

There was a significant difference in overall survival between the 2 groups, with the 5 year survival rate in the 5FU plus ANP therapy arm being 63% vs. 32% in the 5FU only arm

Recurrence rate also differed for the 2 groups, which were 34% and 69% respectively

Lead investigator claims that ANP therapy may find application not only in the treatment of brain tumors as reported previously, but also in the more common colorectal cancer
http://www.colorectal-cancer.ca/IMG/pdf/CCAC_Research_June_19_2009.pdf

Advertisements

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