Critiquing “When is a skeptic not a skeptic”

Posted on April 30, 2013 by Bruce
http://backyardskeptics.com/wordpress/2013/04/30/when-is-a-skeptic-not-a-skeptic/

And the skeptic "convert" has realized his error with respect to #Burzynski. Damn that critical thinking! http://t.co/cl1LQXk8Ej

— David Gorski (@gorskon) April 30, 2013

Recently, @BurzynskiMovie
https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/tweets

https://mobile.twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/tweets
tweeted:

#Burzynski – Fabio: "The Truth is the Truth" | Burzynski: Part 2 | Apr. 27, 2013 | Q&A: http://t.co/oggzymsKYr

— Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) May 7, 2013

https://mobile.twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/331646579238903808

Oh dear, @BurzynskiMovie Shame the "skeptic" realised his mistake when he spoke to people who knew what they were talking about #burzynski

— FW (@frozenwarning) May 7, 2013

https://mobile.twitter.com/frozenwarning/status/331667393850007553

@petecohen_ Except Pete he learned how easy it is to get taken in by #Burzynski movie lies http://t.co/S1R4zgppUe

— MedTek (@medtek) May 7, 2013

https://mobile.twitter.com/medtek/status/331695717187981312
BurzynskiSaves (BurzynskiSaves) on Twitter
https://twitter.com/BurzynskiSaves
… ‏@petecohen_ 7 May. This is brilliant to see some sceptics change their opinions about #burzynski.

“@frozenwarning: RT @petecohen_ Oh Pete, you know that “skeptic” retracted and realised his mistake”. #burzynski

Twitter / medtek: @drpaulmorgan @RudyHellzapop …
https://twitter.com/…/331732447463096…
May 7, 2013 – @petecohen_ Oh Pete, you know that “skeptic” retracted and realised his mistake .

Twitter / medtek: @RudyHellzapop @drpaulmorgan …
https://twitter.com/…/331750875271938…
May 7, 2013 – @petecohen_ Oh Pete, you know that “skeptic” retracted and realised his mistake .

@Quidama
“IamBreastCancer: RT @petecohen_ Sorry, Pete, but that skeptic quickly realized his big mistake about it
Why pretend otherwise?”

FABIO | Burzynski: Part 2 | 1 hour long Apr. 27, 2013 Q&A | Former American Cancer Society spokesperson speaks out… http://t.co/E0CgTW8yFS

— Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) May 7, 2013

https://mobile.twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/331802613815312388
New Video! Fabio: “The Truth is the Truth” | Burzynski: Part 2 | Apr. 27, 2013 | Q&A : http://youtu.be/BuNr06BuXkk

http://fb.me/2dl989AqM
☢ FABIO | Burzynski: Part 2 Q&A | Apr. 27, 2013 Cancer Is Serious Business | Eric…: FABIO | Burzynski: P… http://on.fb.me/13pBIR6 ☠

This is brilliant to see some sceptics change their opinions about #burzynski. http://t.co/VaMqkmtkNs Thanks.

— Pete Cohen (@petecohen_) May 7, 2013

https://mobile.twitter.com/petecohen_/status/331813144836055042

@BurzynskiMovie @joly2u That skeptic in the audience recanted, by the way, showing that anyone can be influence by propaganda.

— Bob Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz) May 13, 2013

4/27/2013 Bruce commented:

http://fb.me/2dl989AqM
16:16

Bruce: “This uh film was was great I I uh … I don’t have a question but I … I think that one of the people on the uh … can respond”

“I happen to be … the head skeptic in Orange County”

And … I think that this film … negatively reflects what the skeptics are all about

I … agree … with everything in this film because it’s been tested

It’s been tested in different countries

So … I want you to re respond on”

“I know that there is a a skeptic that was introduced in your film … which I am appalled by the skeptic myself “

(Mmmm)

“I operate on promoting science”

“I provide (?) skeptic’s groups”

“I have over a thousand people in my group in Orange County … and … I think that I’m going to recommend this movie to all of them”

(Applause, Great, great)

(Eric Merola and 2 panel members speak)

19:46

Bruce: “I think that the reason for that is because … excuse me for … talking out of turn, is that there is …”

(Please)

“… all these scams … in the world … against uh uh against good science with cancer”

“This one is not one of them”

Posted on April 30, 2013 by Bruce
http://t.co/24PJ4xeuOD
“This is a case where I was convinced that a particular alternative cancer treatment was legit, until I dug further.”

Bruce, better grab whatever implement you used to “dug,” and get ready to “dug further;” as you were warned after you initially spoke, and before 19:46 when you spoke, again

“I went to see a controversial documentary about alternative cancer treatments last week at the Newport Beach Film Festival in southern California.”

“The title of the film was Burzynski: Cancer is Big Business, Part II.”

Or, as Dr. David H. Gorski

(@gorskon, @oracknows, @sciencebasedmed,
#sciencebasedmedicine,
http://www.scienceblogs.com/Insolence,
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org
) titled it:

“Burzynski: Cancer is A Serious Business, Part II”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/burzynski-cancer-is-a-serious-business-part-2-like-the-first-burzynski-movie-only-more-so/
Burzynski: Cancer Is A Serious Business, Part 2: Like the first Burzynski movie, only more so?

Mar 14th, 2013 @ 12:05 am › David Gorski

“The invite was from David Gorski, oncologist and editor from”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org,
“which is a very reliable skeptics page.”

“(see below)”

Bruce, exactly HOW did you arrive at this conclusion that Dr. David H. Gorski is the editor of a “very reliable skeptics page“?

He refuses to defend his “Tweets:”

Shall We Play A Game?

“The Skeptics” (SkeptiCowards) vs. “The Skeptics’” Critics #Burzynski

The 1st ever “LIE OFF” (Defend Your Tweet):
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/shall-we-play-a-game-the-skeptics-skepticowards-vs-the-skeptics-critics-burzynski-the-1st-ever-lie-off/
“The film was a bit long at 1:45, but both my wife and I we convinced that after seeing the documentary, we we ‘converted’ to believers,”

Bruce, if you think (?) that “1:45” is a “bit long,” exactly WHAT kind of “films” have YOU been seeing?

“There was a Q&A afterward with the director and several surviving cancer patients, along with the long-winded…… hold on now…. FABIO! and he looks just as good as he did in the 80′s.”

“We expected to see a film that showed how Dr Burzynski, who operates a cancer clinic in Texas, was a ‘quack’.”
(http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/)
“But the film was overwhelmingly in support of Burzynski, and was critical of the FDA “refusing” to allow his work to continue with is (sic ?) antineoplastons in conjunction with ‘personal’ therapies after decoding a patients DNA.”

“The film, directed by Eric Merola, was very well done, with numerous testimonials and the problems of the NHS”

“(Briton’s National Health Service)”

“withdrawing financial support and health care if a cancer patient goes to see Burzynski’s clinic, and how the FDA has refused to let Burzynki continue with phase II studies, and how the FDA had ‘raided’ his clinic, only to find valid testing protocols.”

“The film even had a very convincing doctor from Japan, Dr. Tsuda, who spoke of a 27 year study of Burzynski’s treatments done in Japan under strict supervision.”

Bruce, would that be THIS Dr. Hideaki H. Tsuda?

Burzynski: Japan antineoplaston publications:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/burzynski-japan
Burzynski, Hideaki Tsuda (Japan), and the p53 gene:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/burzynski-hitoshi-tsuda-japan-and-the-p53-gene
“Especially convincing was Tsuda’s common pro-skeptic phrases like

“we should always have doubt”

and

“until we see scientific evidence”.”

“The movie also had several very negative comment about those horrible ‘skeptics” who ‘threatened the clinic” and have “locked up Burzynski’s Wikipedia page” as well as mean and very rough language about Burzynci’s unscientific and untested methods on several blogs.”

Bruce, surely you are NOT referring to “horrible ‘skeptics”” like THESE, are you?

“Those skeptics were mean and evil people.”

“How can those skeptics say that after so many people were cured?”

“The documentary showed MRI scan of cancerous growths decreasing and even being eliminated.”

“This for sure was evidence that is treatments worked….right??”

“By the end of the movie I was a convert.”

“I even stood up at the beginning of the Q&A and said the malevolent skeptics in the movie were not part of the general skeptical movement, were probably on the fridge (sic: “fringe“) area and a minority of how the movement behaves.”

(“I know that there is a a skeptic that was introduced in your film … which I am appalled by the skeptic myself “)

“I even said I will recommend the movie to my 1000 Backyard Skeptic members (the largest skeptics/atheist group in southern California).”

Bruce, either THAT or you will “think” about it

(“I have over a thousand people in my group in Orange County … and … I think that I’m going to recommend this movie to all of them“)

“I spoke too soon……”

Bruce, are you saying that you no longer “operate on promoting science“?

“Actually I do recommend the movie now, not because I think the doctors methods are proven, but to show how even an avid and passionate skeptic can be converted if the skeptic doesn’t use those tried and true methods of critical thinking, not believing everything one sees and hers (sic: “hears“) no matter how convincing it is, and researching the other side before opening one’s big mouth in from of a majority crowd of ‘believers’.”

Bruce, how did you know you were guilty of

“opening one’s big mouth in from of a majority crowd of ‘believers’.”?

Was there an “opinion poll” taken before, and after the Q&A?

“One mad (sic: “man“) who was on the Q&A panel applauded me, as did the audience, and wanted to talk after the panel was finished”

“(I had to leave before it finished).”

“Word quickly got around the Burzynski had a skeptic leader that was converted.”

“Soon I received several well written emails from two scientists, David Gorski from Science Based Medicine, who is a cancer surgeon and researcher, molecular biologist, and has taken an interest in genomics and personalized, gene-targeted therapy, and from pshycolohgist Keir Liddle of Scotland, both who were polite and informative.”

Bruce, if there is one thing that Keir Liddle (@endless_psych) is definitely NOT, it is being a

“pshycolohgist”

Trust me, there’s a much better word that encompasses what he is and does

These might assist your “critical thinking” attributes in determining exactly what that is

Keir Liddle and the Cult of MISINFORMATION:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/keir-liddle-and-the-cult-of-misinformation
The 21st “Bore” and “Misinformation”:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/the-21st-bore-and-misinformation
“The Skeptics” (Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II):
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/the-skeptics
And comments here:
https://www.facebook.com/questions/488444654552853
“Both quoted many articles and websites concerning Burzynski’s methods.”

Bruce, did your critical thinking kick in and make you wonder where their “citation(s),” “reference(s),” and “link(s)” in support of these “many articles and websites concerning Burzynski’s methods,” were?

“I’ve included some correspondence below.”

“Lesson to be learned here:”

“Stick with the critical thinking skills we all promote.”

“Always view both sides before rendering an opinion. find the scientific consensus of those in the specialized field. and be a ‘good’ skeptic.”

“Here is David’s correspondence with me with all the links concerning Burzynski”

Bruce, are you aware that “David” blocked my comments from his blog, gave a lame reason for doing so, and refused to answer questions re claims he made?

Shall We Play A Game? “The Skeptics” (SkeptiCowards) vs. “The Skeptics’” Critics #Burzynski The 1st ever “LIE OFF”
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/shall-we-play-a-game-the-skeptics-skepticowards-vs-the-skeptics-critics-burzynski-the-1st-ever-lie-off/
Is that really the kind of “skeptic” you want to align yourself with?

One who will NOT back up their statements with verifiable “FACTS“?
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/important-the-live-debate-that-wasnt-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics/
“Bruce,”

“I am familiar with much of what is in the second movie from various sources, but I have not seen it yet, although I have seen the first Burzynski movie.”

Bruce, below is MY review of Dr. Gorski’s “review:”
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/my-1st-hand-review-of-oracs-2nd-hand-review-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii
There are at least five major misconceptions being promoted in the second movie, along with patient testimonials that seem convincing superficially but when dissected in more detail by someone knowledgeable like cancer (such as myself) are not:”
http://www.sciencebasedmedi+cine.org/index.php/burzynski-cancer-is-a-serious-business-part-2-like-the-first-burzynski-movie-only-more-so
Bruce, note Dr. Gorski’s role in the below Forbes (#Forbes) fiasco

Forbes censors Peter Lipson “Speech is best countered by more speech” article comments:

A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/forbes-censors-peter-lipson-speech-is-best-countered-by-more-speech-article-comments/

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stanislaw-burzynskis-cancer-success-stories/
“(Please pay particular attention to my discussion of myth #3, where I talk about the clinical trial issue.)”

“I discuss the Japanese studies in myth #4, but a better discussion can be found here:”
http://www.thetwentyfirstfloor.com/?p=7644
“In any case, it is a huge deal that Dr. Tsuda and his group have not published their results yet.”

It is only a “huge deal” with Dr. Gorski, and NOT those of us who know how to read that it is scheduled for publication
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/burzynski-the-antineoplaston-randomized-japan-phase-ii-clinical-trial-study
“Until they do, it is impossible to judge whether their methodology is sound.”

“I do know that this is a trial testing intra-arterial infusion of 5-FU plus or minus antineoplastons.”

“So it is a chemotherapy-based regimen.”

“Without being able to look at the randomization, the statistics, how the trial was set up, etc., it’s impossible to tell whether this trial actually shows what Dr. Tsuda says it shows.”

“As a scientist, I cannot comment one way or the other on it very much until it is actually published.”

Bruce, in fact, Dr. Gorski has showed no inclination whatsoever to “comment one way or the other” on Dr. Burzynski’s 2003-onward phase 2 clinical trial preliminary reports

FauxSkeptic (@FauxSkeptic) tweeted at 11:54pm – 23 May 13:
https://twitter.com/FauxSkeptic/status/337793742243262465
FauxSkeptic (@FauxSkeptic) tweeted at 5:57am – 24 May 13:
https://twitter.com/FauxSkeptic/status/337884947908030464
FauxSkeptic (@FauxSkeptic) tweeted at 7:01am – 24 May 13:
https://twitter.com/FauxSkeptic/status/337901051963400193
FauxSkeptic (@FauxSkeptic) tweeted at 10:28am – 24 May 13:
https://twitter.com/FauxSkeptic/status/337953265100681216
FauxSkeptic (@FauxSkeptic) tweeted at 1:02pm – 24 May 13:
https://twitter.com/FauxSkeptic/status/337992012970225665
“I can, however, point out that it is highly dubious to tout results like this before they are published.”

“The bottom line:”

“I don’t believe it.”

Bruce, the bottom line, I don’t believe anything Dr. Gorski posts because of his past track record:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/05/forbes-learns-a-lesson-but-not-the-right-one-censorship-and-bias-re-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics/
“My mind can be changed by data from a well-designed clinical trial, but right now it’s not particularly convincing evidence.”

Bruce, I will believe that Dr. Gorski’s “mind can be changed by data from a well-designed clinical trial” when he does thorough reviews of Dr. Burzynski’s 2003-on phase 2 clinical trial preliminary reports, instead of making excuses for NOT doing so

“Certainly nothing the Japanese group has published prior to now is particularly convincing, either.”

Bruce, where is Dr. Gorski’s in-depth review(s) of THESE?

Burzynski: Japan antineoplaston publications:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/burzynski-japan
“There is also a lot of obvious conspiracy-mongering in both the movie and the Q&A.”

Bruce, where is Dr. Gorski’s in-depth reviews of THESE?

Where is Dr. Gorski’s review of Wikipedia’s bias?

1. Wikipedia, what’s your motivation?:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/wikipedia-whats-your-motivation/
2. WikipediA or WikipediAin’t?:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/16/wikipedia-or-wikipediaint/
3. Wikipedia, your Burzynski BIAS is showing:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/wikipedia-your-burzynski-bias-is-showing/
4. Wikipedia, you’ve sprung a Wiki Leak:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/wikipedia-youve-sprung-a-wiki-leak/
guychapman (Guy Chapman) Critiquing “The Skeptic” Burzynski Critics: A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics (page 9):
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/05/guychapman-guy-chapman-critiquing-the-skeptic-burzynski-critics-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics-page-9/
I show JzG what a “FACT” is: Burzynski: FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions): Clinical Trial Results:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/i-show-jzg-what-a-fact-is-burzynski-faq-frequently-asked-questions-clinical-trial-results/
Bruce, where is Dr. Gorski’s review of his “pal” Dr. Peter (“bud“) A. Lipson’s bias, and the bias of Forbes’ censor(s)?

A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics:
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:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/forbes-censors-peter-lipson-speech-is-best-countered-by-more-speech-article-comments/
Dr. Peter A. Lipson (and / or his Censor(s)) is a Coward: Critiquing “A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics”
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/dr-peter-a-lipson-and-or-his-censors-is-a-coward-critiquing-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics/
Forbes Learns a Lesson, but Not the Right One: Censorship and Bias re: A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/05/forbes-learns-a-lesson-but-not-the-right-one-censorship-and-bias-re-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics/
Page 1
http://redd.it/1d8am2
Page 2
http://redd.it/1d922h
Page 3
http://reddit.it/1daz6g
Page 4
http://reddit.it/1dc3ka
Page 5
http://redd.it/1df875
Page 6
http://redd.it/1dg2w9
Page 7
http://redd.it/1dh55e
Page 8
http://redd.it/1dld1j
Page 9
http://redd.it/1do1ah
Page 10
http://redd.it/1dsc3t
Page 11
http://redd.it/1dswj9
guychapman
http://redd.it/1dpsj6
“Now, I don’t know what was said in the Q&A this time”

“(perhaps you could provide us with a report), but I do know what has been in the”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/dr-stanislaw-burzynskis-cancer-success-stories-part-2/
“I assume that you recognized all of that for what it was, although you might not have had the background knowledge to realize why the patient stories presented are not nearly as compelling, from a scientific standpoint, as they seem.”

“Many more such discussions can be found here:”
http://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com

Bruce, many more such discussions can be found HERE:
http://www.burzynskipatientgroup.org/
“Also, I’ve also done better than just watch the movie.”

Bruce, if it hasn’t already become readily apparent to you, I’ve also done better than just watch the movie

“I’ve actually read all the peer-reviewed literature that I can on antineoplastons and Burzynski.”

Bruce, I’ve done more than Dr. Gorski

“You are impressed by the phase 2 trials.”

Bruce, don’t you like it how Dr. Gorski tells you what you supposedly are?

And he’s NOT even the:

“pshycolohgist”

“If you’re a lay person, I don’t blame you.”

“They certainly look impressive on the surface.”

“However, what you don’t know is that Burzynski has registered over 60 phase 1 and 2 clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov:”
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=burzynski
“However, he has not published the completed results of any of them.”

Bruce, see my below review re THIS:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/i-show-jzg-what-a-fact-is-burzynski-faq-frequently-asked-questions-clinical-trial-results/
“Oh, sure, he’s published the odd case report or tiny case series, but he has not written up a single completed phase 2 clinical trial, and many of those trials date back to the 1990s, which would be more than enough time to have published multiple studies, given the expected short survival times of the cancers involved.”

Bruce, Dr. Gorski appears to have a problem with being able to give a break-down of WHEN Dr. Burzynski’s phase 2 clinical trials were completed

See below for a more in-depth review I did on this subject-matter, in the “comments” section:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/my-review-of-c0nc0rdance/
“Why is that?”

Yes, Bruce

Why is it that I am the one providing you with better research than the “self-proclaimed” cancer researcher?

“The reason is simple.”

Correct, Bruce

Unlike Dr. Gorski, I AM “unbiased because I do NOT have a dog in the fight
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/stanislaw-rajmund-burzynski-m-d-ph-d-and-freedom-of-speech/
“Back in the 1990s, when the Texas Medical Board investigated him, Burzynski ended up entering into a consent agreement:”
http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/News/burzynski.html
“Specifically, the agreement stipulated that Burzynski:”

• “Cannot distribute unapproved drugs in Texas”

• “Can distribute “antineoplastons” only to patients enrolled in FDA approved clinical trials, unless or until FDA approves his drugs for sale”

• “Cannot advertise “antineoplastons” for the treatment of cancer”

• “Must place a disclaimer to his website, promotional material and ads stating that the safety and effectiveness of “antineoplastons” have not been established”

“Burzynski’s solution to get around this was to set up dozens of phase 2 clinical trials and treat patients on them.”

Bruce, what is impressive is that Dr. Gorski would try to pull the proverbial “wool over your eyes” with another one of his world famous statements that is unsubstantiated

citation(s)

reference(s)

and / or

link(s)

I refer to this as:

“Misinformation“

“Disinformation“

“MisDisInformation“

and / or

“Misdirection

“He then charges thousands of dollars of “case management fees” that can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

Bruce, see below:

Burzynski: Costs of Cancer treatments:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-costs-of-cancer-treatments/
“What might be most useful are these three articles I wrote about Burzynski that review the first movie and delve into his claims:”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stanislaw-burzynski-bad-medicine-a-bad-movie
Bruce, I wrote a “review” of Dr. Gorski’s “review” in the comments section of his blog
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stanislaw-burzynskis-personalized-gene-targeted-cancer-therapy/
“(this analyzes Burzynski’s “personalized gene-targeted therapy” claims)”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stanislaw-burzynski-antineoplastons-and-the-orphan-drug-sodium-phenyl-butyrate
“Merola has produced superficially convincing-sounding conspiracy theories and spun the science in a deceptive fashion, and I hope you can realize that you’ve made a mistake.”

“That’s true skepticism.”

“And don’t think that I don’t ask myself frequently whether Burzynski might actually be on to something?”

“I do.”

“That’s skepticism too. ”

“Unfortunately, Burzynski has never produced evidence that has been enough to lead me to reconsider my opinion.”

“David”

Dr. Gorski has produced superficially convincing-sounding conspiracy theories and spun the science in a deceptive fashion, and I hope you can realize that you’ve made a mistake by taking him at his word

That’s true skepticism

And don’t think that I don’t ask myself frequently whether Gorski might actually be on to something?

I do NOT

That’s skepticism too

Unfortunately, Gorski has NEVER produced evidence that has been enough to lead me to reconsider my opinion

Coming soon for your personal viewing pleasure:

Keir Liddle (@endless_psych) and the Cult of MISINFORMATION:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/keir-liddle-and-the-cult-of-misinformation

Follow the “LIE OFF” (Defend Your Tweet):
http://redd.it/1ewce0

PREDICTWEET:
http://www.predictweet.com/results.asp?q=burzynski&n=100

PREDICTWEET
http://www.predictweet.com/results.asp?UserSearch=1&q=Burzynski&x=0&y=0

PredicTweet.Qirina:
http://com.predictweet.qirina.com

TWITTER:
https://twitter.com/search?q=%23burzynski