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://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
