CHEEZ WHIZ !!! http://anp4all.com is nothing more than Robert J. “Bob” Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz)’s thick processed cheese spread of http://thehoustoncancerquack.com
Where he asks:
DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE AN OPEN MIND? DO YOU HAVE THE ALL THE FACTS?
He is supposedly a “Professor of Writing”, but check out his writing gaffes here, as “ANONYMOUS”
Yes! Weekly: Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business Part II:
“The skeptic who called Dr. Burzynski “my little Polish sausage” has a Polish last name, which the director Eric Merola scrubbed from the movie”
Just because you think that referring to someone as:
“my little Polish sausage”
is humorous, and therefor we should excuse your behavior because of your below excuse, does NOT mean that it makes it acceptable
“Literally one second after he said that, all of the other participants made jokes about that fact”
(which of course was the point)
“Instead allowing the audience to hear that ribbing, Merola inserted an evil laugh, which was lifted and spliced from minute 18:25 of Virtual Skeptics episode 13”
If you thought that was an “evil laugh”, you’ve got an overactive imagination
“Voices were altered to sound sinister, and menacing music was added”
If you thought voices sounded “sinister” and that was “menacing music”, you must not watch any scary movies
Do you think this is a fair representation or were you misled?
I think it’s a fair representation that you try to mislead people
“What about the 2-hour rejection from The Lancet?”
“High impact journals like The Lancet receive huge numbers of submissions, as their journal is the most prestigious”
“The vast majority of papers that get rejected by The Lancet are rejected within 48 hours thanks to an editorial pre-screening process that helps accommodate this huge work load”
“Most researchers are thankful for this courtesy because it allows them to resubmit to other journals more quickly”
“Why does Merola try to convince the audience that this is evidence of a conspiracy against Burzynski?”
All of your above comments prove what a waste of time you are, based on:
Critiquing: In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski “cancer cure” is reviewed…with Insolence:
2 hours 8 minutes and 51 seconds
The Lancet Oncology Peer Review Team D-12-01519: #FAIL
“Does Eric Merola have any conflicts of interest that he is not disclosing?”
“Eric Merola does not reveal a possible conflict of interest, one that a journalist would feel obliged to share”
“He fails to disclose in the movie that his cousin was a patient of Dr. Burzynski and that he has raised money on his movie’s website for patients to see Burzynski”
Sounds like someone failed to read the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section on the BurzynskiMovie web-site:
“Burzynski has never published the results of those trials but keeps the money:”
“Burzynski’s abysmal trial completion record, over sixty abandoned trials, the trust of every patient who participated betrayed”
“If trial completion were a batting average, he’d be batting .016”
“His publication average is .000.”
“over sixty abandoned trials” ?
This just shows that you do NOT even know the subject-matter
Have you even bothered to read Burzynski’s publications ?
Burzynski updates Scientific Publications page:
Because if you had, you would know that Burzynski has used the clinical trial design proposed by Fleming
16. 2003 Trial design – Fleming (Pg. 94)
17. 2004 Trial design – Fleming (Pg. 317)
2-stage phase II clinical trial design proposed by Fleming used
Initially, 20 adequately treated patients to be assessed
If less than one Objective Response (Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)) observed, it’d be concluded there was less than desired activity and study would be discontinued
If one or more Objective Responses observed, 20 more patients would be accrued to study
If 4 or more responses observed among 40 patients, evidence would be sufficient to conclude the treatment has desired activity
One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials
Biometrics. 1982 Mar;38(1):143-51
Obviously, it took time to accrue the number of patients who fit the specific protocol criteria to complete the study, and you would NOT publish the final results until all the data was compiled
“Speaking of harassment…”
“Merola does not mention that skeptics only caught wind of the Burzynski story in November 2011, after a teenaged blogger critical of the Clinic received phony legal threats from someone who had been hired by the Clinic to “clean up” its reputation”
Poor Welsh schoolboy Rhys Morgan
Where did he get the information for his blog ?
From other bloggers ?
Because I could NOT see any indication that he did any “real” research
And when I attempted to post a comment to his blog, he turned out to be a coward, like so many of The Skeptics™
Didymus Judas Thomas
April 1, 2013 at 5:19 am # 51
1. Burzynski does NOT charge for antineoplastons
2. Burzynski has had “Independent” sources in Kurume, Japan complete a Randomized Phase II Clinical Trial study utilizing antineoplastons that doubled the 5-year survival rate of cancer patients
3. You do know that the Declaration of Helsinki does NOT require Burzynski to publish when YOU think he “ethically” should, right?
Your comment is awaiting moderation
“This person, Marc Stephens, sent this high school student images of his family’s home, the message clearly:”
“We know where you live.”
“These threats were well documented in the international press”
“Somehow Merola managed to not mention that in the movie”
Marc Stephens’ actions were idiotic
My personal opinion is that he should have done what I am doing, which is showing how “The Skeptics™ lie, misinform, disinform, misdirect, deceive, misrepresent, etc.
Eric Merola did NOT mention your lame blogs either
Why don’t you complain about that ?
“Burzynski has a long history of patients believing that symptoms of getting worse are signs they are getting better”
“Follow any of the links at that site to hear how, in patients’ own words, this EXACT SAME misleading interpretation has been fed to patients for decades”
So, are you a doctor ?
I didn’t think so, quack
“Merola has publicly slandered Burzynski critics in a way a real journalist couldn’t”
Why can “real journalists” NOT slander someone ?
“We hope this makes it clear that what you are seeing in the new Burzynski movie may not be entirely reliable”
So, like this web-site ?
The Burzynski Skeptics:
The #Burzynski Skeptics™ are SkeptiScared:
“The Skeptics” (Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II):
The Skeptics Theme Song:
The #Burzynski (B.S.) Bump Rap: