Didymus Judas Thomas, Contributor
Musings on the intersection of Articles, Bias, and Censorship
(The BIG 3: A.B.C.)
4/19/2013 @ 9:43PM
Peter A. Lipson, M.D.’s Article:
“A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics”
was posted:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterlipson/2013/04/19/a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics
onforb.es/11pwse9
Dr. Lipson has a web-site which advises that he:
“is an internist and medical blogger”
peteralipson.net
Dr. Lipson states in relation to Dr. Stanislaw R. Burzynski:
“His clinic claims to have a unique approach to cancer involving an experimental (and expensive) treatment he calls “anti-neoplastons”.”
Or, “antineoplastons”
Dr. Lipson does not state the relevance of his “(and expensive)” comment, as compared to any other cancer treatment
Nor does he indicate as he did re the other doctor, whether
” people come from all over the world to visit him and his colleagues”
in relation to Dr. Burzynski
Perhaps he was pressed to publish his article before he had time to completely research the subject-matter
Dr. Lipson contines:
“The basis for these claims is controversial to say the least and I’ll leave it to others to go into detail.”
The link that Dr. Lipson provides links to this source:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?s=burzynski
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, Dr. Lipson does not disclose in his article that he also publishes on this site:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/editorial-staff/peter-a-lipson-md
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/author/palmd
And that it is the site of Dr. David H. Gorski, who disclosed on social media that “Peter” was his “bud”
Dr. Lipson states:
“The Burzynski Clinic seems to be quite different”
“For one thing, it’s marketing seems to rely more on patient anecdotes than actual data”
I guess it’s possible that during his
” exploration of the public face of the Burzynski Clinic”
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com
http://www.cancermed.com
the good doctor was unable to find the “Scientific Publications:”
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/scientific-publications.html
Burzynski updates Scientific Publications page | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/burzynski-updates-scientific-publications-page
Dr. Lipson comments about:
[A] well-known “vlogger” who goes by the handle “C0nc0rdance”
and his
“posting a video critical of Burzynski”
and C0nc0rdance’s paranoid statement:
“He used the legal thuggery tactic of submitting a false DMCA in order to force me to give him my home address so that I can be the subject of legal harassment and intimidation by his lawyers and media thugs”
“And later:”
“I’ve been in touch with Eric Merola by email, and he’s agreed to retract his copyright claim if I can get his email removed from all the mirrors”
Dr. Lipson does not opine about the manufactured “hysteria” activities by the Burzynski “Critics,” that occurred on Twitter, YouTube, and other social media sites, which entailed this “fact-challenged” video being “mirrored” (duplicated), a ridiculous amount of times
My review of C0nc0rdance | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/my-review-of-c0nc0rdance
Dr. Lipson goes on to state:
“As a public figure issuing threats to another public figure, I don’t see how he should be entitled to hide his email, but I am not a lawyer.”
This is an exceptional point; and by that I mean Dr. Lipson pointing out that he is “not a lawyer,” since lawyers are usually bound by ethical rules
Dr. Lipson comments that Dr. Burzynski is
“not an oncologist by the usual definitions”
I am not sure what relevance this is since Dr. Burzynski is a biochemist
A fact that Dr. Lipson should have been able to find during his painstakingly, meticulous research
I am not sure if Dr. Lipson has an opinion that oncologists are somehow superior to biochemists, or not
Nor does Dr. Lipson disclose whether or not during his thorough investigation, he found if Dr. Burzynski works with any oncologist(s), or if any oncologist(s) are listed as co-authors on any of his clinical trial publications
Dr. Lipson goes on to state:
“His publications in the field of cancer are few…”
I am not quite sure what Dr. Lipson means by “few,” or why it is that Dr. Lipson was able during his previous research to find;
“By a quick check on PubMed, the (young) doctor I met there has about 60 publications to his name”
but was not able to find Dr. Burzynski’s 36 cancer publications that one can find, by
“a quick check on PubMed”
utilizing the search terms:
Burzynski S Cancer
or the other publications he has by utilizing the search:
Burzynski S
Dr. Lipson contines:
“Burzynski administers his experimental “antineoplaston” therapy under the aegis of clinical trials, but of sixty-one registered trials, he has completed only one and has not published the results of any of them.”
A “quick check on” clinicaltrials . gov using the search:
Burzynski S
displays what Dr. Lipson is referring to
However, Dr. Lipson does not mention:
Burzynski: Not every cancer clinical trial taking place in the United States is listed on our NCI clinical trials database | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/burzynski-not-every-cancer-clinical-trial-taking-place-in-the-united-states-is-listed-on-our-nci-clinical-trials-database
Also, if one follows the links on clinicaltrials . gov; which is supposedly sourced from the NCI, which link to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), one finds that the results are different, which leaves one wondering which source is correct
61 TOTAL
1 – Not Yet Recruiting (Open)(Phase 3)
1 – Closed
2 – Terminated (Withdrawn due to slow enrollment)
7 – Withdrawn (This study has been withdrawn prior to enrollment)
10 – Recruiting (Open)
11 – Open (1 Not Yet Recruiting / 10 Recruiting)
40 – Active, not recruiting (Closed)
http://cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/search/results?protocolsearchid=11475951
http://cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/search/results?protocolsearchid=11476036
Dr. Lipson posits:
“Rather than a traditional trial setup, his patients pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege of participating in the studies (not the most ethical or effective subject selection strategy).”
Speaking of ethical, Dr. Lipson does not mention if Dr. Burzynski is receiving Federal funding or funding from any large pharmaceutical company
Or, If not, where does he propose Dr. Burzynski receive funding from?
Simply offering that there is a problem without offering a solution seems to be so very “last century”
Dr. Lipson also does not compare the costs of cancer treatments
Burzynski: Costs of Cancer treatments | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-costs-of-cancer-treatments
Dr. Lipson proceeds with:
“Burzynski’s treatment statistics (survival rates, etc.) are not made publicly available; all we get are anecdotes, nothing to help us compare his clinic to others.”
Luckily for Dr. Lipson, I provide resources like this:
Burzynski Clinical Trials (The SEC filings) | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/burzynski-clinical-trials-2
Dr. Lipson continues with:
“My experience with the Cleveland Clinic could not be more different from my exploration of the public face of the Burzynski Clinic.”
and:
“The other is a personality-driven clinic with questionable ethical standards that, despite claims of effective new treatments, declines to publish results that can be used by the rest of the medical community.”
Well, I’m glad I could help
Down at the bottom of the article it has:
“Comments”
“Facebook”
“Twitter”
“Email”
“SHARE:”
I’m not quite sure why an opportunity to comment is provided, since when I commented on the article numerous times, my comments were censored (removed), as I documented here:
A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics
Forbes censors Peter Lipson “Speech is best countered by more speech” article comments | Didymus Judas Thomas’ Hipocritical Oath Blog
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/forbes-censors-peter-lipson-speech-is-best-countered-by-more-speech-article-comments
I found this to be quite ironic, considering that the source that this article was posted on, has done a number of articles re censorship, and given that in his article, Dr. Lipson states:
“Speech is best countered by more speech.”
and:
“Attempts by supporters of Burzynski to shut up critics (by whatever reasoning) is antagonistic to the goals of medicine to collect, analyze, and disseminate information.”
The question is, what motive would Dr. Lipson have for writing an article like this, and for comments to be censored?
I consider myself to be a “Critic Critic,” or “Skeptic Critic,” if you will
DJT
Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog 