“The Amazing Meeting” (I don’t think it means, what you think it says it means): 2 Intellectually and Ethically Challenged Individuals, Twaddle at TAM 2013

Gentlemen, I start your Insolence 😇
——————————————————————
(1:30) [1]
——————————————————————
The “motto” of “The Amazing (Not so Much) Meeting” is “Fighting Fakers,” which is apropos, since I doubt that “Orac” the “Check my Facts” Hack of Dr. David H. Gorski, grasps the irony, that when I read some of his blog articles, you could easily switch his name with the name of some individual he is flogging, and the proverbial shoe fits, and:
——————————————————————
(1:40)
——————————————————————
“This is a guy who sometimes fools even, you know, physicians”
——————————————————————
(I couldn’t have said it better, myself) 😊
——————————————————————
(2:47)
——————————————————————
He states:

“There is a long segment about “The Skeptics”

(applause) 😝
——————————————————————
(4:25)
——————————————————————
“His lawyer wrote a book”

“About a half of it is about Burzynski [4]
——————————————————————
6:00
——————————————————————
Gorski mentions that Burzynski noticed that there were higher levels of these chemicals in healthy people, than people with cancer
——————————————————————
Whereas, Burzynski is on record as having said [5]:

” . . . healthy people have abundance of these chemicals in blood
Cancer patients have varied to none

I did NOT know before now, that GorskGeek thinks that “none” is a “level” 😶
——————————————————————
He continues:

AS2.1 – which is a chemical called phenylacetic acid, which is a byproduct of metabolism that turns into phenylacetylglutamine by the liver

A10 – soluble is basically the same thing
It breaks down to PAG
——————————————————————
WOW !

I thought it was: AS2 1 😊

They are “basically the same thing” ? 😳

What does Burzynski say ? [6]

Phenylacetylglutaminate (PG) and Phenylacetate (PN) are metabolites of Phenylbutyrate (PB) and are constituents of antineoplaston AS2-1

PG and PN are naturally occurring in human body as result of metabolism of phenylalanine in liver and kidneys

formulation of antineoplaston AS2-1 is 4:1 mixture of synthetic PN and PG

A10 is 4:1 mixture of PG and iso-PG

That does NOT look like “basically the same thing” to me 😛

20131111-160455.jpg
——————————————————————
(6:50)
——————————————————————
Gorski founders on:

“And these are substances which were actually studied in the ’50’s and ’60’s and not found to be particularly, um, promising, but, he didn’t know that then”
——————————————————————
GorskGeek has #FAILED miserably to prove that on his blogs [7] 😄
——————————————————————
(8:00)
——————————————————————
Gorski comments about Burzynski’s “animal testing,” “species specific” claims:

“There are ways of getting around that”
——————————————————————
But Gorski, again, has #FAILED miserably to prove it [8] 😅
——————————————————————
(12:00)
——————————————————————
Gorski makes lame excuses about the NCI phase II clinical trial [9] 😖
——————————————————————
(12:50)
——————————————————————
Gorski claims Burzynski was indicted for insurance fraud in the 1997 case 😱
——————————————————————
GorskGeek, care to try and prove that one also ? [10] 😃
——————————————————————
(14:25)
——————————————————————
Gorski then states that out of 61 trials on clinicaltrials . gov, “most” are “closed or unknown”
——————————————————————
GorskGeek #FAILED again 😁

At the time it was:

1 – Not Yet Recruiting
(OPEN)(Phase 3)
1 – COMPLETED
2 – WITHDRAWN
(Withdrawn due to slow enrollment)
7 – WITHDRAWN
(This study has been withdrawn prior to enrollment)
(9=WITHDRAWN)
10 – Recruiting
(10=OPEN)
40 – Active, not recruiting –
(40=CLOSED)
61 =TOTAL
——————————————————————
(15:20)
——————————————————————
Gorski attempts to go all “legal eagle”:

“Listen to Burzynski’s lawyer!”

“You listen to Burzynski’s lawyer; and, and I swear I don’t understand, like why Burzynski would let him, let his lawyer say stuff this damning in his own book, but he does”

“So, get a load of some of these quotes, referring to one of the clinical trials, he says:”

“It was a joke”

“. . . there could not be any possibility of meaningful data coming out of the so-called clinical trial, it was all an artifice, that, you know, designed so that they could continue giving the treatment

“The FDA wanted all of his patients to be on an IND, so, that’s what we did”
——————————————————————
Gorski, attorney Rick Jaffe is an American, living in America NOT the formerly communist Poland

He can say whatever he wants

GorskGeek is NOT a lawyer 😓

And there’s an excellent reason why

Nor is he schooled in the proper usage of the English language

FACT:

” . . . the so-called clinical trial . . .”

Any human being with a modicum of intelligence about the English language, understands that the term “clinical trial” is singular, i.e. one

Burzynski’s lawyer is obviously referring to the CAN-1 clinical trial mentioned in Burzynski’s 11/25/1997 Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing [11]

One trial that is retrospective is CAN-1 Clinical Trial
——————————————————————
CAN-1 PHASE II STUDY OF ANTINEOPLASTONS A10 AND AS2-1 IN

PATIENTS WITH REFRACTORY MALIGNANCIES

133 patients
——————————————————————
Clinical trial of patients treated by Dr. Burzynski through 2/23/1996

FDA has indicated it will not accept data generated by this trial since it was not a wholly prospective one
——————————————————————
Gorski continues his trend of #FAILURES when he mentions the additional types of treatments that Burzynski was offering, but he #FAILED to mention [12] 😂
——————————————————————
” … 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”
——————————————————————
(18:20)
——————————————————————
Gorski addresses the case of Tori Moreno
——————————————————————
Kim Moreno states:

“We originally were at Miller’s Children at Long Beach Memorial and then went to City of Hope

“We also sent her MRI’s to Dr. Fred Epstein in New York to be looked at”

Gorski suggests that 3 different opinions could have misdiagnosed Tori Moreno

You can read an interview with Tori’s mother [13]
——————————————————————
(19:45)
——————————————————————
Gorski goes on to mention Burzynski patients going to Texas Children’s Hospital with hypernatremia issues
——————————————————————
Gorski, do you mean this ? [14]

The changing pattern of hypernatremia in hospitalized children

Department of Pediatrics, Texas Children’s Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
——————————————————————
(20:00)
——————————————————————
Gorski mangles the case of Hannah Bradley, who had a grade 3 anaplastic astrocytoma brain tumor

GorskGeek makes excuses like “spontaneous remission”, but then provides no citation, reference, or link to a case of such a tumor having spontaneously exhibited remission [15]
——————————————————————
(20:40)
——————————————————————
Gorski states that antineoplastons are chemotherapy
——————————————————————
No, Gorski, antineoplaston are:

“…an unapproved drug, not ordinary “chemotherapy [16] 😣
——————————————————————
(21:53)
——————————————————————
Gorski claims in regard to Burzynski’s personalized gene-targeted therapy:

” . . . gives to the patient without regard for synergistic toxicity

“Boom, there you go”
——————————————————————
Gorski’s #FAIL rate continues, as Burzynski has stated that phase 2 and 3 publications are reviewed as part of this process [17]

Gorski, “BOOM, THERE YOU GO” ッ
——————————————————————
Gorski, you should hire out to the Democratic Party as their mascot, because you must be the biggest pompous ASS I’ve ever seen 😜

Gorski, my advice: don’t quit your day job, HACK 😷
——————————————————————
The #TAM2013 audience then has to suffer through 22:36 of the blatherskite of Robert J. (don’t call me Bobby) “Bob” Blaskiewicz Blatherskitewicz [2]

He blathers about the “dozen,” “17,” “16 dead,” “pancreatic cancer,” “Joseph, who was alive but died well within the life expectancy given his diagnosis,” “Joann, who was alive but died within a year of starting therapy,” “Irene S., who was dead within month,” “Maxine, who was already dead,” the “103 in 2011,” “63 in mid-June,” “17 on original 1999 site,” “about 3 added a year,” the “about 50 stories,” “1/10th of patient names gathered,” “Amelia S. – 7, tumor breaking up,” “Chase,” “Cody – 1994, 20 years ago, 2 visits, 6 weeks treatment breaking up,” “David,” “Janet, 3 – 5 yrs., oncologist, now dead, ovarian cancer,” “Pete took video down,” “8,000 patients,” “probable ischemic necrosis,” “13 yr. old, getting worse getting better, vomited – Marlene, nurse,” “Rory died 2005,” “Supatra, swelling, last wed., brain tumor,” “Side-effect, 2%, sodium load,” “Andrea, U.S. News and World Report, 30% chance recovery, glioblastoma, ANP in luggage, died on plane,” “Cathy wanted to be on ANP, Greg Burzynski, found out only brain tumor,” “Denise D. breast cancer,” and finally:
——————————————————————
(18:45)
——————————————————————
” … and light as many fires under his butt as we can
——————————————————————
Mentions Rick Jaffe’s book Galileo’s Lawyer

IT’S ALL ABOUT THE PATIENTS [4]
——————————————————————
All you need to know about Blaskiewicz is:

“White man speak with forked tongue” [18]
——————————————————————
The 3rd video is a panel discussion, which includes “man-crush” tag-team [3]

Robert Blaskiewicz and David Gorski
——————————————————————
(8:00)
——————————————————————
Bob says:

“Yeah, I’m not that type of doctor
——————————————————————
Bob, the correct answer for you, is:

“I’m NOT a doctor” QUACK
——————————————————————
(13:05)
——————————————————————
Gorski gabs that he’s a:

“Game of Thrones Geek”
——————————————————————
I just knew I was right, GorskGeek [19]
——————————————————————
(14:00)
——————————————————————
The only female panelist mentions “bureaucrats”, “wimps”, and “people without balls”
——————————————————————
2 out of 3 ain’t bad

She describes the Bob and David show to a T
——————————————————————
(15:00)
——————————————————————
The claim is made that a Burzynski physician appeared on the Burzynski Facebook page announcing results
——————————————————————
(16:00)
——————————————————————
Gorski #whines that the Texas Medical Board wasn’t successful in shutting Burzynski down because of “politics”
——————————————————————
LAUGHABLE
——————————————————————
(20:55)
——————————————————————
Gorski gives his usual excuse:

“He’s not an oncologist”
——————————————————————
GorskiGeek, that claim is as dead as apparently, quite a number of your brain cells [15]
——————————————————————
(34:40)
——————————————————————
Audience members are given the opportunity to speak, and this is the garbage served up:
——————————————————————
“Hi, this is Susan

Ah, don’t forget to mention that Wikipedia has been a major battlefield

We’ve had 23,000 views to the clinic’s page this last month, also rebutr . . .”
——————————————————————
“Control the flow of information”
——————————————————————
Gorski pipes up:

“What she said”
——————————————————————
(35:20)
——————————————————————
Blatherskitewicz chimes in:

“When it comes to Wikipedia can I just mention that is, that is, that that is so effective that Wikipedia was singled out in the most recent Burzynski movie
——————————————————————
Gorski chirps:

“Yes”
——————————————————————
Bob yacks:

“as being controlled by evil skeptics
——————————————————————
Gorski ejaculates:

“No, seriously”
——————————————————————
Bob bleats:

“No”

(applause)
——————————————————————
“You have to unleash the evil hoards of skeptics

“Wahahaha” 👿
——————————————————————
Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski on Wikipedia:

“Simply don’t pay attention to it, because it, it’s not true”

“You won’t be able to, do any, clinical research which we do, without convincing evidence, especially when you have the most powerful agency in the government which is against you

“So they would love to find something which is wrong with what we are doing”

“Ah, so the fact that they’ve, um, agreed that what we have has value, and they allow us to do phase 3 clinical trials it means that we are right”

“Because, uh, uh, nobody who didn’t have any, concrete evidence that it works, would be able to go as far”

“So whatever Wikipedia says, well, I don’t care for them

(laughing) [5]
——————————————————————
Enlightening ?

Inspiring ?

Amazing ?

Hypocrites

Apparatchiks [20]
======================================
REFERENCES:
======================================
[1]David Gorski – Why We Fight (Part I): Stanislaw Burzynski Versus Science-Based Medicine – TAM 2013 11/8/2013 (22:44)
——————————————————————

======================================
[2]Robert Blaskiewicz – Why We Fight (Part II): It’s All About The Patients – TAM 2013 11/8/2013 (22:36)
——————————————————————

======================================
[3] – Medical Cranks And Quacks
TAM 2013 JREF
11/8/2013 (42:42)
——————————————————————

======================================
[4]“Galileo’s Lawyer” Richard A. Jaffe, Esq.
——————————————————————
http://www.richardjaffe.com
======================================
[5] – 11/9/2013 – Pete Cohen chats with Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/pete-cohen-chats-with-dr-stanislaw-burzynski/
======================================
[6] – 6/2012 – Journal of Cancer Therapy, 2012, 3, 192-200 doi:10.4236/jct.2012.33028 Published Online June 2012, Pg. 192
——————————————————————
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/9219.pdf
======================================
[7]Burzynski: Oh, RATS!!!:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/the-lancet-oncology-peer-review-team-d-12-01519-fail-2/
======================================
[8] – Critiquing: How Stanislaw Burzynski became Burzynski the Brave Maverick Doctor, part 1:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/critiquing-how-stanislaw-burzynski-became-burzynski-the-brave-maverick-doctor-part-1/
======================================
[9] – 9/19/2013 – Critiquing: National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) CancerNet “fact sheet”:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/critiquing-national-cancer-institute-nci-at-the-national-institutes-of-health-nih-cancernet/
======================================
[10] – 9/25/2013 – Critiquing: National Council Against Health Fraud, Inc. – NCAHF News: JURY NULLIFICATION THWARTS BURZYNSKI CONVICTION:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/25/critiquing-national-council-against-health-fraud-inc-ncahf-news-jury-nullification-thwarts-burzynski-conviction/
======================================
[11] – 7/9/2013 – Burzynski: The Original 72 Phase II Clinical Trials:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/burzynski-the-original-72-phase-ii-clinical-trials/
======================================
[12] – 4/26/2013 – Burzynski: 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:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/burzynski-fda-requirements-that-cancer-patients-utilize-more-traditional-cancer-treatment-options-in-order-to-be-eligible-to-participate-in-the-companys-antineoplaston-clinical-trials/
======================================
[13] – Tori Moreno
——————————————————————
http://www.cancerinform.org/aburzinterview2.html
======================================
[14] – 9/1999 – Pediatrics. 1999 Sep;104(3 Pt 1):435-9
——————————————————————
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10469766/
======================================
[15] – 11/2/2013 – Critiquing: Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s cancer “success” stories:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/11/02/critiquing-dr-stanislaw-burzynskis-cancer-success-stories/
——————————————————————
10/25/2013 – Hannah Bradley – I Feel Empowered, In Control Of My Body: Four Women On Fighting Cancer With Alternative Therapies http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/10383724/I-feel-empowered-in-control-of-my-body-four-women-on-fighting-cancer-with-alternative-therapies.html
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/hannah-bradley-i-feel-empowered-in-control-of-my-body-four-women-on-fighting-cancer-with-alternative-therapies-httpwww-telegraph-co-ukhealth10383724i-feel-empowered-in-control-of-my-body-fo/
======================================
[16] – NOT ORDINARY CHEMOTHERAPY
——————————————————————
https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/27/27.F3d.153.93-2071.html
======================================
[17] – 9/4/2013 – University of Michigan, where is alum Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski’s Grapefruits ?:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/university-of-michigan-where-is-alum-dr-david-h-orac-gorskis-grapefruits/
======================================
[18] – 10/13/2013 – Why “The Skeptics™” Perfessor Robert J. (don’t call me “Bobby”) “Bob” Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz) of University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire, “Fame,” is a Coward and a Liar:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/13/why-the-skeptics-perfessor-robert-j-dont-call-me-bobby-bob-blaskiewicz-rjblaskiewicz-of-university-of-wisconsin-eau-claire-fame-is-a-coward-and-a-liar/
======================================
[19] – 10/27/2013 – “The Skeptics™” Burzynski Bias, Censorship, Lies, and Alibi’s: September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/27/the-skeptics-lie-lied-lies-liars-lying-burzynski-bias-censorship-lies-and-alibis-september-28-2013-the-skeptics-burzynski-discussion-by-bob-blaskiewic/
======================================
[20] – 11/9/2013 – Wikipedia Articles:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/burzynski-timeline/
======================================

Advertisements

Robert J. (don’t call me “Bobby”) Blaskiewicz’s #Epic Skeptic “Word-Salad” #Fail – September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51

Are you there ?
Okay, we might as well get started if were going to do this
Alright, so ummm I guess we can start with uhhh bit of a conversation
Uhhh
You’ve been on the Burzynski Hashtag for a long time – what’s you’re motivation ?
Okay
So what information have Skeptics posted that they uhhh that they missed that demonstrates that Burzynski’s uhhh treatments are effective ?
What, what have we missed ?
Well okay, uh one of the issues that Skeptics have with Burzynski is that in order to, let’s say, elevate uh the profile of his drug, in order to make sure that everybody who needs it can get, is to complete a phase 3 uh trial uh he started uh I believe was it just the one, right ?
Uhmmm, and that’s gone nowhere
In fact, it was withdrawn this I think within the last week
It doesn’t look like its going to happen, and this is, you know, for all the the phase 1 and phase 2 trials, those are very preliminary trials
Uhmmm, the phase 3 is is will be the gold standard, and also the bare minimum that that the larger medical community will accept uhhh as evidence, so it’s like you’ve lowered the bar for for evidence in a way that that you know oncologists don’t
The the
Right
So, do you think that there is a uh uh conspiracy to keep Burzynski from publishing ?
Right
Right
So, uhmmm, as far as I understand it The Lancet, uhhh the the question of The Lancet publication ehhh is par for the course, that most people are, when they get a speedy rejection from a uh uh, uh journal, are actually uh grateful, because that means there allowed to go ahead and submit their material to another journal more quickly and get it out there
Uhm, but the reaction that we saw on the side of the Burzynski camp was that, see, they’ll never publish us
Uhm, which is, eg, taken as far as I can tell as evidence of a conspiracy or that his name is is poison uh I mean, I think it is, but uhmmm, that wasn’t indicated in the in the rejection letter in order to uh claim that it is is to go beyond the evidence which again we’re not really willing to do
So, uhmmm what is the the ration the the something that I think a lot of of a lot of The Skeptics have been curious about when it comes to your your your blog and your behavior on-line uhhh is that that that, that the format of your blog does not make sense to us, we don’t understand exactly what you’re trying to do with it
Could you kind of clarify that for us because it’s uhhh long and it’s it’s intense and there’s a lot of emotion behind it but we don’t understand exactly, what it’s supposed to mean
Alright, ah have you read The Other Burzynski Patient Group ?
So, ahmmm what is your response say to the story of Amelia Saunders ?
Okay, what part of, what did I get wrong ?
Uh was that Amelia and Luna ?
Luna was the other one, correct
Oh, I, you’re talking, oh this is one of the very 1st ones that we did on the, on the site
Uhmmm, oh, her name is, her name escapes me at the moment
Um, but she wasn’t there for for very long but uh her condition deteriorated very rapidly
Uhmmm, and one of the questions that we had, we raised, is is, you know, you you don’t need to reach full dosage ’cause the the full dosage for these ANP seem to be pretty high, at least the sodium load that that that patients are asked to to carry, or required to carry if they they go on it
And we wondered if the sodium load was ah to great for someone who has a brain tumor, I mean uh, you know uh sodium load will increase your blood pressure, and these people have extra things in their brains that probably won’t react well to swelling, right, and and wont react well to pressure, so we were wondering, if in fact you don’t have to reach the full dosage in order to have uh severe side effects
Ummm, you know maybe you haven’t reached a therapeutic dose level, but that doesn’t mean that it didn’t have an effect on her
And you can clearly tell, that, you know in the videos, well at least the videos before the family took it down, that she was lethargic and a little bit out of it, she uh the the difference in her conscious state was no noticeable for anyone to see
Ummm, to, you know where she had been up and about to in her bed kind of slurring and and, and and and, in fact just disoriented, just looked like someone had taken the piss out of her
I mean, ummm, so that’s, that one, ummm, you know the critique that, reaching therapeutic levels and having a biological effect on someone are are clearly different things in her case
Uhmmm, now I never went on you know on to say ummm that uh she had uh reached therapeutic levels
Uhmmm, I I think as far as I went was that she went, she paid her $30,000 dollars and then she died
Uhmmm, and and and what part of that’s not true
Okay, so, um, going back to Amelia, um, some of the the most um I think the most serious charges is that we see a uh repeatedly in his uh uh stories of his patients, um those are all cited, those are all backed uh by, you know, um at least as good as anything the Burzynski Patient Group has ever done
Uhmmm, something that we see over and over are patients reporting over and over that signs of getting worse are signs if getting better
Um, in particular a, uh report that’s very common from from patients is that the center of their solid tumors are breaking up
One of the problems that we we we see is that that is more frequently a sign of ischemic necrosis that the tumor has outgrown its blood supply and that it’s dying on the inside
And when you see something like a 5th of the patients who we’ve been able to to document, reporting this excitedly, we get extremely concerned about what’s happening
Uhmmm, what part of that is not absolutely terrifying to you
Well, the the yeah I’ve never seen anyone say that the purpose of the antineoplastons is to cause uhhh, you know, to restrict the blood flow to the tumor and and and uh cause it to die that way, which is certainly one therapeutic approach that’s been, that’s been floated and research has been done on uh and might even be promising and uh what he’s saying is that cancer is caused by a lack of antineoplastons in the system and that basically what he is doing is antineoplaston uh uh supplement therapy uh rath, what’s the word I’m looking for, uhm uh, replacement therapy
Uh and there isn’t a doctor on the planet, uh not a medical specialist on the planet, who, I, who has identified at at as a contributing factor as a contributor to cancer or antineo or lack of antineoplastons
So
Why isn’t he, you know, you understand that these doctors, ummm like nothing is true or false because a doctor says it is true or false
Uhmmm it’s it’s it but when the entire medical community uhhh who are des are desperately are are every bit as tired of seeing patients die uhmmm and seeing patients suffer or as anyone else’s families are you you imagine what an oncologist sees in that office over the course of of a year and there’s going to be unimaginable suffering
I’m sure that they’re tired of that
And that they would, you know, that if there was the slightest hint that antineoplaston deficiency was a cause of cancer that it would make it into the literature, with or without Burzynski
Uhhh ummm, why should we trust him when he has uh the sole uh the only person who had identified antineoplastons as a contributor to cancer when he is the sole manufacturer of the of the therapy uh when he is the uh sole prescriber of the therapy and when he is, where the sole distributor of the therapy from his pharmacy
He’s read everything
I think
Can you go ahead and send me that link that that I saw in the chat that you had uh posted a couple of times in the chat
Could you send me that link, to that publication
I can give you a minute to to go find it if that’s
That would be good
Uhmmm
Well, yeah that’s a, that’s you know one of the major problems that this this cancer has is the location is such a pain to get to
Uhm, and often when we are talking about these cancers, the thing that gets me over and over and over, and this is something that I’ve learned from from working uh with others on the Burzynski Patient Group is what’s it like to be a cancer patient, only by proxy, man I couldn’t imagine really going through this myself, and, you know I’d hate to see my family go through this
That these people are at what could be described as a low point, they’re um uhhh, you get a diagnosis of uh brainstem glioma the prognosis is very bad
Uhmmm, there are only a few cases of people recovering from that, I mean they’re there uhm uhhh but, you know that it’s an, it’s an extremely grim prognosis
Uhhh and I worry that when they’re in that desperate state and especially let’s talk about the children, you have these kids who are uh you know 2 and 3 and have had this, you know uh awful diagnosis and the parents are willing to do literally anything to keep their kids alive
What protections are in place for patients as far as that these kids are and and their parents are protected
Who had the better results ?
Okay
Hmmm, yeah, the, Guy Chapman has just um uh tossed in a a, a comment
I guess uh that there are a lot of people who wanna talk to you (laughter)
Uh, Guy Chapman has just jumped in and said it looks like you forgot the phase 3 trial is withdrawn and none of the phase 2 trials were published
Uhmmm, this, this is not a minor thing for for for Skeptics
This, this is exactly what will convince us to get on board the Burzynski train is the publication of these trials
But even the preliminary trials, one has been finished, and none has been published in its entirety for over 15 years
When you consider that this is a, as you just pointed out, this is a a cancer, the, especially the brainstem gliomas
That these cancers uh the cases resolved fairly quickly, we know what the outcome are fairly quickly
Ummm, do you have any sense of when these trials are going to be published ?
From Laura ?
Right
When you, when you think about a major, sorry, go ahead
Yeah, right, uh
Antineoplastons has a better rate ?
Right
Right, one of the things that that there there are 2 points to be made here
Uhm, the 1st one is that major pharmaceutical companies that are getting this accelerated approval have a track record of producing results which Burzynski does not have
Secondly, when it comes to ummm the rates of antineoplastons, how can we possibly say without a single published trial he, that he has an improved rate over Temodar or anything like that, and that’s exactly what would show to us whether or not his rate is better, the the types of publications that he’s done, that look really good on paper, ummm, to the to the, the common persons eye are these case series where he goes through and picks out people who have happened to have survived
But what that doesn’t tell us is whether or not the antineoplaston had anything to do with it
What you need to do is go and separate the background noise, the random weird rare but very real survive, unexpected survivals that occur, and separate those, uhhh, from any effect of antineoplaston, he’s never done that
But if you think about that, I mean that if it does have a a an improvement rate above uh other treatments
That still has an improvement rate, you know, that, that would give another option to people, ummm, even if in the aggregate their rates aren’t better
It might work on some individuals tumors rather than on, you know, you you it it is it taken as a, as a lump but extend life by uh quality of life for 3 months or something um in some cases but, you know, it it still has an effect, a real effect, and deserves to be out there
That’s a long time when someone is dying
Well, one of
One of the problems that that doctors have in in this country when it comes to doing ummm antineoplastons studies to verify any any effect that uh Burzynski has uhhh I i think back to the one where people say well that the FDA sabotaged his trials, and
Well, if if you think about it though, um, the, the proposed action as I understand it of the antineoplaston is that it’s a deacetylase inhibitor, which slightly unspools DNA, that allows uh, which would allow uh proteins to get into a pair of damaged DNA
And we have drugs that do that which carry a much lower sodium load
Uh, um, it, that would have a therapeutic effect on and that the risks outweigh the possible benefits of using this one particular drug
Um, I’ve seen any number of people looking at um, if you look at the Luna ah Pettiguine uh uh story on The Other Burzynski Patient Group um you see that the doctor is absolutely horrified by the insane sodium load that that Burzynski’s patients are carrying
Um in in some ways that that sodium load is uh leading people to constantly drinking up to I’ve seen 12 liters of water a day
That’s not necessary for other deactsylace inhibitors
Um the, why would you prefer that to to another drug if it did essentially the same thing, that didnt have this massive side effect ?
thats not necessary for other deactsylace inhibitors
Well that sss I believe that that’s proposed by the researchers, the design trial, you know they they sign off on it but that is is, is up to uh Burzynski uh my uh David James @StortSkeptic on the
ah he has asked everything that Burzynski does looks sort of like the behaviors of pseudo-science
So what we’re saying uhhh he does uh uhhh Burzynski like for instance like I said he has vertically integrated, ah, he controls all parts from identification to the creation of the drug uh to the diagnosing uh well he doesn’t do the diagnosing but he does um um prescribe and distribute, he does all that vertically, which is actually something that snake oil salesmen do
Another thing that that’s a red flag in Skeptic circles is that his one compound seems to be a sort of panacea for all sorts of different types of, of of cancers, um where we know that cancer has a a varied uh, uh, ideology and and the uh panaceas are are are to be and a variety of different types of causes um, in fact in any one tumor you would, you could say that these, these tumors are are completely uh heterogenous
The idea that there’s gonna be one knockout, it seems rather unrealistic
Um, additionally he charges immense amounts of money for this drug, um, even though the components cost pennies
Um, on top of that, um, there’s something that he asks for a a huge payment up front
That’s something that’s been warned against for generations of uh by anti-quack um uh crusaders if if they’re asking for everything up front, then be afraid
Ummm, another thing is that uh the kind of cult that’s sprung up around Burzynski, uh, one that is immune to uh criticism, reason, and pits people who are doing standard cancer research, as enemies, um, creating a black and white version of the world where there are good people and there are bad people
There are people who are fighting the disease, and then there are people who are really helping the disease
I mean, if you look at the, the new web-site by the Burzynski patients fighting back group, they say support the cure not the cancer
That’s a manikin world-view of black and white
Um, these are all huge red flags, that you’re dealing with a quack
Um, why hasn’t Burzynski done anything to change that ?
Right
Well, there, this is important
This is really important though
Wha, when she’s talking about, that’s Luna Pettiguine’s mother, is is talking about the costs there
Uhmmm, you, when someone is not insured in in this country,
Ahm, the, the the base cost that that’s calculated is, is the hospital only expects to get a fraction, a tiny fraction of that back from the insurance companies, and that’s why the costs are so inflated
Um, usually, when a patient is self-pay there is a self-pay price which is a more reasonable price
Additionally, all of those therapies, have demonstrated efficacy, and if Burzynski were to demonstrate his efficacy, $30,000 dollars to start on a life-saving treatment for a child would be a steal, and he would earn every nickel of it
Um, so, those arguments hold very little weight with us
He has a a an enormous house that’s valued in the tens of millions of dollars, he could do that if if the other, the other thing he could do, and this, we would love to see him do this, wousa, would be apply to Federal grant
That, that would be amazing, if he could get a grant to study this stuff
But, you know, um, I I don’t think he’d be able to get one, I don’t think he’s shown uh that he can carry off a uh a research program responsibly
Uhmmm
Well
Oh he, have you noticed the the, the thing on his web-site where if you make a donation to the clinic it goes directly to him ?
Right
You know, you know
Ummm, o-kay
Uh, I want to turn this over to the people who are watching
Um, I want to give them a a chance to address you as well
Uhmmm, hi everyone
Uhmmm, so, um, let’s, let’s wait for for that to roll in, and I do wait to go back to the, the the, the and let’s be very specific about this, the the things that you see on The Other Burzynski Patent Group, a patient reporting that um uh getting worse is getting better
How do you explain that ?
Well that’s just a known side-effect, your going to know that going in, but we actually have people say
Are there, why why why not, these people, see this is the thing though
The reason that site was started was because the people that don’t make it don’t have a voice
And when you, when you whittle away, when you only look at the at the, the positive outcomes, which is exactly in Burzynski’s favor to only look at the positive outcomes, and to have no sense of how other people’s diseases progressed, right, you’re gonna get a skewed and inaccurate version of the efficacy of this particular drug
Now lets lets lets go back and not talk about Laura, lets talk about these patients who report symptoms of getting worse, as if they were signs of getting better
Some people say that oh it’s a healing crisis or it’s progression of the disease
Or other people say it’s breaking up in the middle, hurrah
No, it’s actually a tumor that’s growing
That record there, that’s being left by patients, whose stories are every bit as important as the as the stories of the patients who have lived, are painting a completely different picture
How do you explain that ?
Are they feeding these people their stories ?
Are they feeding these people their stories
Okay I’m going to go back, I want to point something else out to you
Um, I have to, I don’t remember the exact patient so I have to go back to my web-site to take a look at it
Um
Because we are, because we’re on a Google+ stream that that’s a lot of data it takes awhile to bring up my, my site
Let me
Uhmmm
Well, that seems to give him an instant out, no matter what happens
That turns his claims into something that’s unfalsifiable
If I could give you an example of what unfalsifiable is
Um, and I’ll I’ll draw an uh, uh, case, uh hypothetical case of um uh proposed by Carl Sagan as the invisible dragon in your garage
If you say you have have a dragon in your garage, um, you know, you should be able to go over and verify that there’s a dragon in the garage
So let’s say we go over to Carl Sagan’s garage and, you know
Well, I don’t see anything
Well it’s an invisible dragon
Well okay, well then, let’s uh spray paint it
Well, it’s incorporeal
Well, uh, let’s measure for the heat of the breath
Well it’s heatless flame that it breathes
And, you know, okay, well then we’ll put flour down on the ground to see that it’s it it’s standing there
And, oh no it’s ah it’s floating
Well, you know, at some point, when you can’t falsify something
When you cannot, even in principle, prove something false, it’s indistinguishable from something that’s not there
And that kind of out, that oh well the tumor can keep on growing
Th (laugh) that that that’s an invisible dragon, as far as I can tell
A every time that I and and and and , and David points this out, that um, you you know your not going to speculate about the the FDA but then at every turn your invoking the FDA as being obstructionist
I, I just find that to be contradictory and and self-defeating
Um, let me see
Well, that’s not necessarily true
I mean uh when it when it comes to the case um I’ve i’ve talked to oncologists about this
And when it comes to uh for instance in in this case it sounds like it was a pediatric patient who was dying, ummm, who had died, ummm, the,
the 1st inclination is to ascribe the death to, um, to the tumor, which actually, would be to Burzynski’s benefit if there were other cases, I’m not saying there were, but if there were other cases where this type of complication arose, and it was ascribed to the tumor they might well not do it, uh, do an autopsy
Um, it’s ah as you could imagine it could be very difficult for the families to do that especially when they have ooh ah, a possibility of what, you know, led to the ultimate demise, that didn’t involve them ultimately somehow being responsible for it, right ?
So, it it it doesn’t seem to me that necessarily an autopsy would be um a a done deal
Um, let me see
No we don’t and it would be irresponsible to completely speculate on on, on, the outcome of that uh, uh, uh, individual patient, I am still scrolling through looking for this story that I wanted to talk about
Uh, and, I guess I’ll
It should be in Amelia’s I I, I packed Amelia’s story with all the stories, um, that I could find um in what we’d written up already
Um
Hold on a sec
She is a cute kid though
Um, alright
Now, our favorite oncologist (laugh), as you keep putting it, um, uh, with with the Amelia story, um, uh, was able to correctly determine that the Saunders family, had a, did not understand the significance of this cyst that had opened up in, uh, that had opened up in the center of the tumor, in fact they were ecstatic
They were delighted
Um, the family, of Haley, um, S, also
Uh, the the family of Haley S., also, had the same reading given to them
Um, the same diagnosis uh same prognosis was to, was given to Justin B in 2006
A similar cyst in Lesley S’s story uh ah, was in 2006
Um, and that kept her on uh treatment for a a another month so that could be another $7,000 some odd dollars
We same thing in the, in the case of, uh, Samantha T in 2005
We see it again as far back as 1994, in Cody G’s story
And then lastly and and the worst uh thing that we’ve seen, the patients report that Burzynski himself told Chase uh Sammut
The exact same thing
Um, and that was a
Have you read Chase’s story
It would stick with you, because that case is grotesque
The parents, uh, there was even a uh, uh, a fight over whether or not the parents should be allowed to continue treating this kid
He was basically lying, uh, in a uh uh brain dead uh for all intents and purposes, uh, in a in a coma uh without possibility of reversal, in his parents living room for months
Um, eh, all the while, he’s still on the, uh, well I don’t actually, I can’t say that, I don’t exactly know if he was on the treatment the whole time
Um, but, we do have this pattern, that is there, of people believing, that this particular pattern is, uh, progress, a a is not progression of disease but is is inducement to to stay on, um, eh, and this has been going on for decades
Eh, eh just based on what we’ve been able to find that patients have been reporting this for decades
At some point, you would think that a doctor would realize that perhaps what these patients are walking away with is inaccurate
Why hasn’t that changed ?
E wel that that that that’s not it
This is this is like the 2nd day of oncology class, that that’s what the tumor looks like
People are reporting that the tumor is no longer growing, um, or that the growing has slowed after they’ve started
Well, okay
There, there is an explanation for that, and why you can’t take that as necessarily being evidence of efficacy
Ah, the tumor grows exponentially while the resources are available to it, but then it reaches a point where it’s a self-limited growth, so it, the time between uh doublings in size decreases logarithmically
Um, so this is, this is like basic tumor physiology that we’re talking about, and his patients don’t leave his office, knowing these facts, for decades
This doesn’t have anything to do with the, do with the drug
This this
But, but when it’s, this treatment is working or this is not evidence that the treatment is working
That’s pretty basic
I mean we’re not, we’re not talking about deactsylace inhibitors or anything like that were you’d really need to know something about
This is, whether or not, you’re getting the outcome that you want
This is the whole reason for going
And it has nothing to do with the with the with the drugs
Which is, which is like which we just pointed out was a was an invisible dragon
you’re you’re you’re assuming
You’re you’re you’re assuming that
You’re assuming that
Um, I’m not assuming that
Ultimately it would, but whether or not it it it had a genuine therapeutic effect is a different matter all together
Um, this, what would, what would convince you that you’re wrong
So you’re saying because the Orphan Drug Designation and the face that there’s a phase 3, therefor it works ?
So what you’re saying is there’s nothing that would convince you now, that it doesn’t work
O-kay
Um, it’s it’s it’s not the FDA’s, but you understand it’s not the FDA’s job to tell someone that their drug doesn’t work
it’s it’s it’s up to Burzynski
It’s up to Burzynski to show that his drug does work
And it’s always been his burden of proof
He’s the one that’s been claiming this miracle cancer cure, forever
Um, I don’t know if you’ve read Jaffe’s book
There seems to have been a lot going on there you really should look at it because it’s it’s it’s kind of revealing
Um, that that that it seems that there was a lot of political pressure applied to the FDA which may have been, uh, uh, have influenced the way in which these these trials were approved
I I would say that it is a genuine con uh uh bit of confusion on the parts of Skeptics
We don’t know why the phase 3 trial was approved
I don’t know that we’ve seen even the phase 1 trials, we don’t know why he’s getting a phase 3
And there’s a real story in that, we think
Um, that we’d love to see, however we can’t see, however we can’t see it because of proti protri proprietary uh protections that the FDA is giving to Burzynski, right ?
They’re not sharing his trial designs because they are his trial designs, right?
That the makeup of his drug that he’s distributing are his, uh design, and his intellectual property
So the FDA is protecting him, uh from outside scrutiny
While you may imagine that that, that that the FDA is is somehow antagonistic toward him
They’ve given him every opportunity, over 60 opportunities to prove himself worth uh their confidence and hasn’t
Um, but I definitely recommend that you look at Jaffe’s book and you will see, I think, um that um it’s called um, uh Galileo’s
You know what it’s called, okay, yeah
Um, definitely look at that
Um, you, you will see, the ways in which, the way that we got to this point, isn’t necessarily having anything to do with the efficacy of the drug
That comes across very clearly
Um, you, you mentioned it yourself, he he’s done well to listen to Jaffe’s advice, right ?
So, there there’s a lot to that
Um, uh, but yeah, let me go back to the Twitter feed
Um
Well it sounds to me like they’re they’re not um, the the the you know, they’ve put the clinical hold on now because they now have evidence that somebody may have died because of the treatment
Um, I don’t know what the state of that is right now
Um, uh, oh my gosh, um, let me see
Someone has just sent me a, a ah a link to, are you following the Hashtag, as this is going on
Okay
I’m doing, I’m doing the 2 things at once and it’s um, ok ok well it’s well ok I can’t I can’t go in and read that right now
Um, I would, ok let me tell you exactly what it will take, for me to come around and promote Burzynski
Um, for me, he needs to get a publication in a uh, yeah, uh uh uh publication in a peer-reviewed journal, a respected peer-reviewed journal, not like the the Journal of Medical Hypothesis or things we just made up
Um, something, you know, a a good, respectable journal that oncologists would read, that research oncologists would read
I would need an completely independent group to replicate his findings, and then I’d be all for it
I would say that right now, the business model that the Burzynski Clinic seems to depend on, as best as I can tell from an outsider, that, um, uh, that it depends on people paying money up front
It doesn’t depend on him developing and taking away a viable drug, that he can market to the entire world
His business model as best I can tell, is to keep it in house
That seems, if it works, if his drug genuinely works, and he hasn’t sent it along to mass approval, where he gets, for a couple of years at least, you know, exclusive rights to produce and sell this stuff, for one of the most intractable diseases, uh that man eh can can can, you know, can get, um, that suggests to me that there’s something else going on here
Now, someone has just sent a a note, uh that he has failed 3 different Institutional Review Board audits; this is Guy Chapman, uh no other institution has a 3 for 3 fail, according to to Guy iye he knows no other one
Um, that 45% of phase 3 clinical trials fail due to deficient phase 2 design
Um, he has an approved phase 3, but phase 2 was deficient so phase 3 fails
Do you think that that could possibly have anything to do with why we’re not seeing the phase 3 advance
He’s claimed
He’s claimed
That’s a different thing altogether
And in fact
Well, you understand why they do that, because in order to, it’s
No, they do do this with other drugs, well, it depends on the type
Some drugs it’s ethical to give something completely questionable, what they want to make sure that they at least get the standard care, you know which includes radiation
Um, and radiation does seem to extend life, reduce the size of some tumors some times
Um, do you concede, that in order to have a phase 3, you do not need to have a successful phase 2 ?
When 45% of phase 3 fail because they have a deficient phase 2 design, do you concede that ?
Well, ok
It doesn’t matter where
It doesn’t matter where it comes from uh, um
So-kay, um that would be shooting the messenger as opposed to dealing with the question, but
the idea, the best, well, the best, well in that case the best response is “I don’t know”
There’s something that that we don’t know, you’re coming, honestly we didn’t know what to expect when we talked to you
We, were looking at the design, of your web-site and wondering whether or not we would be able to get a a coherent sentence out of you, because the web-site is disorganized, uh
Um, at at at at least it’s the organization is not apparent to the readers
Um, and um according to
No, that is tied together
But let me, we know that that the the, the central concern is Burzynski
Ah, the source of this ah of of those #’s that I just gave you, Chapman has just updated me and he says um that it is, and I’ll go back to the, the ADR research . com issues in clinical research, so it’s the question, Bay Clinical uh Research and Clinical Development, a white paper called “Why do so many pase 3 clinical trials fail ?
Uh, it’s prepared by Anastassios Retzios, Ph.D
Is Anastassios Retzios reliable ?
There is a correct here
Exactly
That’s the right answer
You don’t know
You don’t know
You need to look into it
Alright ?
Before you dismiss it you have to look into it
Everytime somebody throws uh uh something to me, I have to look into it
That’s just, it’s my responsibility as a reader
Um
What, what stuff would you like
What stuff would you like me to do ?
I generally, I don’t read your blog
Uh um, alright
Okay, I’ll look at that, and I will respond to it once I’ve taken a look at that, okay ?
Um, and I’ll respond on your web-site
Um, seems only fair
Um, one question I’d wondered, what is the Didymus Judas Thomas reference to
Oh, so this is the Doubting Thomas
This is the Doubting Thomas
Okay, so this is the one, you show me the, you put your your, the, your hand inside the wound
You know, Jesus says, basically, ok, bring it on, check me out, right ?
Okay
Alright
That that, I didn’t, I didn’t realize that he was also, that that was the same guy
So, it’s it’s the Doubting Thomas
Um, what we would say, um, is that if Burzynski is the savior that he claims to be, that he should, open up his trials, he should open up his uh research uh protocols um and just say, “Look, bring it on”
Check out these wounds
But he’s never done that
Instead he he he wants us to just take the words of of of of his apostles
I don’t necessarily trust his apostles
I don’t think that they’re unbiased
I wanna see the data
I wanna see the the wounds in his hands and the the mark on his side
Oh, hey when when we talk about The Other Burzynski Patient Group, I don’t make any pretensions to make that my site proves anything
I I I really don’t
It’s not my job to prove anything
It’s Burzynski’s job
It is a researchers job to prove these things
But we just pointed out, we just pointed out, that the FDA, often approves, phase 3 trials, based on flawed phase 2 clinical trials
That is therefor a real possibility in this case
Yes you would
T t and what I would honestly expect and hope, is that you would be honest about this, to yourself, and and and that’s the thing we don’t, we often don’t realize that we’re not being honest with ourself
I try to fight against it, constantly
But, um, uh but the way that you’d earlier phrased your uh your response to “could you possibly be proved wrong ?”, . . really did exclude other possibilities of of of of yourself being wrong
So if the FDA
Well I’m not talking about the Guy Chapman
What you off, when I asked you, yourself, you know, what would prove you wrong, you said that the FDA hasn’t approved a phase 3
Well, ok
Let’s let’s back, let’s back up
What would the FDA, what happens if the FDA occasionally op op opposes, approves uh phase 3 trials, based on bad phase 2 trials
Would that be, would that cause any doubt in your mind ?
About the efficacy of ANP
Yeah, hello, yeah, you’re back
Yeah Google+ is a little wonky sometimes
But, would, does, if you were to learn, that sometimes phase 3 trials, uh, are approved, and failed, based on flawed phase 2, would, would that make you reconsider your position of the phase 3 being evidence that it works
Uh um could you send me that link, the, the, um . me see
I’m just looking at other things that are coming in on the Hashtag right now
Um, so the ANP is Orphan Drug status but is it Orphan Drug for glioma ?
Is it sodium phenylbutyrate or is it the the versions of the drug, the AS10 stuff or A1 or whatever it’s called ?
Okay, that’s what has Orphan Drug status
Alright, I’ll look into that
I hope somebody is writing all this down out there, so that we can go back and look at these claims later, right ?
So, oh, um
Do you have any questions for me ?
I’ve spent a lot of times asking questions of you
Mhmm
Guy Chapman, throws up the the, the comment, permission to investigate is not evidence of anything other than evidence of a valid protocol, not a uh, evidence of efficacy, in and of itself
That’s another comment
Um, alright then, this is your chance t, there are lots of people have lots of questions about me out there
Uh, about what my motivations are and such
I might as well put that out on the table just so it’s on the record, is that I am taking exactly no money from anyone for this, and have gotten nothin’ but grief from a lot of people, even people who, even people who support me have given me grief for this
Um, just so that you know, um, there have been, some of the things that have happened, oh, this is an important point too
Um, that when we have criticized this, uh, a # of us, especially Gorski, uh myself, uh Rhys Morgan, uh, um, and and uh Popehat, the the lawyer, blog, uh, um, who else was on there, um, oh, the Merritts, uh, t, uh Wayne Merritt, and his family, people have been critical of of of Burzynski have faced retaliation for opposing him ah and intimidation, and including, um, I had my uh a couple weeks before Christmas my, my, the Chancellor of my University was contacted via e-mail, and uh Eric Merola said that I had been um, uh, been spreading mis truths about Burzynski, that I had been a be, on my my show um had said things that were demonstratively untrue, and he also said that the drug was FDA approved, which it, you know, that’s not right
But um, he said that he was gonna do, talk about me in his new movie, in, uh, relat, in millions of homes, um, and he wanted to get a statement from the University
The University of course ignored him, and immediately let me know that I was going to get smeared
Um, I consulted my lawyer and uh uh, you know, the best course of action was figured out, and um uh a Gorski has had his accreditation board contacted, he’s had his bosses contacted, Rhys Morgan received threats of liable suits from somebody who had been hired, by the clinic, to clean up his on-line reputation if he didn’t take down his on-line review of Burzynski, uh, had his a picture of his house sent to him, clearly the message being, “We know where you live kid,” uh, Wayne Merritt; a pancreatic cancer patient, this is something that, that people generally, do not recover from, like generally, die from, received phone calls at home, from, this individual, threatening him with lawsuits; he doesn’t have a law degree so he’s misrepresenting himself
Um, but all of this, was done, to critics
Do you think that is deserved ?
Do you think that that is right ?
Mhmm
Well to be fair
It it it doesn’t strike me as necessarily a “Free Speech” issue, you know
Was it down-voted ?
No
Mhmm
Mhmm
Well we do have for for for for one thing, um, I guess to understand is that we are uh motivated by um uh a respect, this is the one thing that that all Skeptics I think um are uh respect critical thinking, um, and um respect scientific uh a we we’re mostly scientific enthusiasts, there’s some Skeptics who are not um, uh, you know oh u space nerds, or whatever who are um just sc scholars and the humanities but for the most part we all respect scientific consensus and we respect scientific method and have an enthusiasm for living in the real world, this is something that like all of us us are about
And to that end, sometimes that influence is how we run, is how we decide to run our personal web-sites
Um, uh, that whether or not we want our, to give a platform to people who disagree with us, um, you know, uh, when we do, uh . . it it is our sandbox, you know, right ?
This, this, we’re allowed to to let whoever we want into our sandbox if we, you know, uh if we want
Did he, did he leave them up ?
Did he leave them up ?
Right, um, do you think that he is required to answer you
Right
Mhmm
Um so a a question uh why were why do you have so many Twitter and Wikipedia sock-puppets
Wikipedia
You left Wikipedia
Mhmm
Um a
Uh We have uh a response from David James, everyone uh gave you a fair shout
You were a spammer plain and simple
You couldn’t, you couldn’t
work out your questions
Twitter does not
Twitter does not block people for for arguing
Only for spamming and policy violations
Mhmm
Okay
Um, let me see
Each new account was blocked for additional violations of policies
Um, this is a uh uh referring to the Wikipedia rules too
Um, so
Um, Wikipedia, do you know why um they’ve locked the Burzynski page ?
Did you notice the part where he threatened, did you notice the part where he threatened to expose Wikipedia
We have to, well, they they uh are looking that it’s not one-sided information they want to show
Like they discuss, there is controversy about this guy
Yeah, Jaffe’s on there
Jaffe’s on there
uh well you could add that if you hadn’t gotten blocked
Okay
Um, so, who are you
She’s gotten threats
So we don’t know who you are
Like, she has suffered at the hands of some really mess, and she’s also, you have to realize she’s in the U.K, where libel laws are very lax at this point
That’s changing, ah, but uh, the the legitimate criticism, there is a big case last, me maybe 2 years ago of Simon Singh, talking about an alternative therapy, and, um, he was just saying that there’s no evidence for it but it’s promoted by um chiropractors, or something, or something like that
And he got slapped with a libel suit that cost him several years of his life and a lot of money
Um, so, there are several reasons why someone in the U.K. might uh be uh reticent to use their real name um, uh, and legitimate reasons
Um, in the U.S., I’m not sure that there is
I’ve been using my real name for a long time now
Um, you know, Gorski blogs under his real name, and is critical of uh, uh, also, let’s face it, everyone know, knows who “Orac” is
Um, how do we know that you don’t work for the clinic ?
Mhm
Well see, one of the the problems is, Ju, I don’t know if you were around for the BurzynskiSaves thing
Did you ever see that account ?
Mhmm
Right
Oh no, I mean you have a right to do that but but I I’ve found that posting under a pseudonym diminishes my credibility
Um, so, . . the quote was uh um, uh, “Happily promotes bogus therapies,” was Simon Singh’s quote that got him sued
Um, but Josephine Jones does it to, quote “protect her family”
Um
So there’s that
Um, are you afraid for you’re family ?
Um, you don’t see that there would be anything to gain from, from going on-record ?
Um I I haven’t, I’ve never, honestly, I’ve never seen a Skeptic actually go after a person individually
Um, you know, uh, you, unless they were doing colossal harm to people
Um, to to focus on an, uh, let’s say, call someone’s work for um, yeah
Cite one example, of a Skeptic making shit for a Burzynski shill or anyone else in real life
That’s a quote
That’s, that’s something coming in from, from Guy
Like had anyone ever contacted Sheila Herron, or has anyone to to um, go after her job, or go after um, you know, my brother has gotten stuff from people
He didn’t tell me because he didn’t want to upset me, but my brother gets things from Burzynski supporters that are violent and threatening
I get letters telling me that I suck cancer’s dick
Um, I I’ve all sorts of things um, and I just, I’ve never seen that, that intrusion into real life on the part of uh, um, uh, Skeptics
I’ve never seen them doing that type of of of stuff
I’ve never seen them threatening bogus lawsuits
Um, and I I I wonder there, if there is some sort of, what do you think accounts for that, that difference?
Mhmm
Mhmm
I’ve I’ve I’ve shown up on, you know, as you, as you might, I imagine you moni, you monitor the Hashtag, right ?
Okay
Um, which is, which is your right
Um, uh, but every so often I jump in and say, you know, this movie has some flaws in it
You know, that’s something I say rather frequently
Um, and I invite people, if they’re interested, to take a look at a couple of links
I don’t, I, you’ll notice that I no longer force people to like, “Well how do you explain this ?,” because that doesn’t seem to be very persuasive, or work at all
Ah, only people who are open minded to having their mind changed, those are the only ones I want to talk to
So I give them a choice
Kind of like Morpheus in The Matrix really
Um, b, that was a joke for me
Um, um anyway
Um, but, it it I, honestly, I would encourage you to go on-record, um, but I have, less than nothing invested in that, so, um
Uh, what’s next for you
Well what happens
Well what happens if he doesn’t understand what you’re saying ?
I mean one of the
I mean seriously
Well, one of the problems I think that a lot of Skeptics have had, in in back channel discussions about this is that we don’t understand exactly what you’re saying
We certainly don’t understand why you’re so attached to him if you’ve never had any uh, you know, close dealing with uh, uh, with Burzynski
We don’t really understand that
Actually, especially when you consider, that all the information that we’ve put forward, that we’ve backed up with statements from uh, you know, uh, it, it, the statements that we have from from patients saying that you know, we’ve we’ve, we were told that, no that’s not exactly, they put it usually that but that that we believe that getting worse is getting better
Like how could someone continue to defend someone, when we pile up all of these different, you know, sources, saying the same thing ?
It it is, it is beyond us and we wonder if there’s absolutely anything that we could say that would convince you otherwise
But, I mean, but that means
Everything on The Other Other Burzynski Patient Group is referenced
It goes
There’s very little on
thehoustoncancerquack
There’s very little on
thehoustoncancerquack in the 1st place
Eh, right
The they both go to the same place
Uh un but, you know, we, the thing that that totally befuddles us, and is just endlessly frustrating, is like how many more examples, of patients believing that getting worse is getting better, and it’s not us saying it, it’s the patients saying it
And how many more of those patients do we need to to give you before you will like reconsider that perhaps you might be wrong ?
I don’t, the thing is though that, that that’s a inver, shifting the burden of proof off of Burzynski
Burzynski has to prove them wrong, has to prove him right
The FDA is not there to say this doesn’t work
The evidence would be
The evidence
The evidence would be phase 2 trials
And ev the evidence would be a completed and published phase 3 trial
That’s not forthcoming
The phase 3
You don’t know that he’s trying
He’d start completing these trials
And he would, he would be soliciting um, uh, lots of um, uh, you know, you know he’d be putting out papers constantly um and if the the British Medical Journal example’s anything uh representative of how Burzynski works, he’d immediately tell everyone that his he’s being . . blackballed by the, by the journal, even when it’s just a courtesy that he gets a a rejection
So, I mean, honestly, um, saying “Well, when the F, FDA tells you that it doesn’t work, the FDA’s never gonna say that because that’s not their job
So, given that what would, how many more patients do we have to show you before you consider that you may be wrong ?
That’s not an option, because they’re never gonna do it
They relinquish, a lot of authority, over to Burzynski, and his Institutional Review Board, which, I would mention, has failed 3 reviews in a row
Right ?
It is Burzynski’s job to be convincing
It is not our uh, uh, it it it he hasn’t produced in decades
In decades
In hundreds and hundreds of patients, who’ve payed to be on this
Hell, we’d we’d we’d like a prelim, well when you’re talking about something that is so difficult as brainstem glioma, that type of thing gets, really does in the publishing stream get fast-tracked there
they test it
Yeah, and they they they want uh, that was evidence of fast-tracking is what, that rejection was uh e was very quickly
Um, so, uh, uh again, the FDA is not the arbiter of this
It’s ultimately Burzynski
So, how long will it be before Burzynski doesn’t publish, that you decide that uh perhaps he’s he’s, doesn’t have the goods ?
You’ve been speculating about what the FDA’s motivation are like crazy
Why not speculate about Burzynski a little bit
Well actually I’m not even asking you to speculate about Burzynski, I’m only asking you to tell me, how long would it take, uh how, for him to go unpublished like this, um, for this long, before you would doubt it ?
What ?
But these but but but that doesn’t have any bearing on
That doesn’t
Oh I’m not asking you how long, how long, would it take you for you to start doubting whether or not he has the goods ?
How long would it take ?
It’s a it’s a it’s a question that should be answered by a number uh uh months ?
Years ?
How long ?
It’s been 15 years already
I could push it back to 36 years
He hasn’t shown that it works for 36 years
I can do that
I was being nice
Perhaps based on bad phase 2
He withdrew
He withdrew the the phase 3 clinical trial
I that before recruiting,
although I’ve seen lots of people say they were on a phase 3 clinical trial
I wonder how that happened
Uh did do do you think that if they thought that he was a real doctor that they all would have refused like that ?
He’s changed things
That The Lancet is a top-tier journal like New England Journal of Medicine
It’s basically be, besieged by uh 100′s of people submitting their, their, their reports
Um, it’s just, you know, let’s say he, someone has such a thin publishing record as Burzynski does, do you think that it’s likely that he will ever get in a top-tier journal ?
What about the the Public Library of Science ?
It’s not the only journal there
What about BMC Cancer ?
There’s lots of places that he can go
Um, and he doesn’t seem to to have evailed himself of that, as far as I can tell
And I would know because he’d get rejected, or he’d be crowing, you know
Either way, he’s gonna tell us what happens
He told us what happened with The Lancet, you know
I don’t have any evidence that suggests to me that he’s even trying
So let’s go back to this
How long will it take ?
How long will it take before you, the Japanese study’s interesting too because we should be able to find that in the Japanese science databases, and we can find, we can’t find it at all
We can’t find it anywhere
And, and those are in English, so it’s not a language problem
We can’t find that anywhere
We’ve asked
We asked Rick Schiff, for, for that study
And, and it hasn’t come to us
He is now I believe on the Board of Directors, over there
He should have access to this
We can’t get it
How how long will it take before you recognize that, nothing is forthcoming ?
How long would that take ?
Well, I mean, were talking about a blog here
We’re talking about life
No, we’re talking about a blogger’s feelings in that case
In in this case we’ren talking about, 1,000′s of patients, over the course of of of generations, you know
This is important stuff
This is not eh eh equating what’s happening to to patients with what’s happening to you is is completely off-kilter as far as I can tell
It’s nothing
It’s nothing like you not getting to say something on my web-site
You know
This is they they have thrown in with Burzynski, and they’ve trusted him, and he’s produced nothing
Nothing of substance
Nothing thas that has made all of that um, uh, n nothing th th th that uh his peers would take seriously
The other thing that that that strikes me now is that, you know, you you you you keep saying that, well Eric is going to to share things with you
Does it ever concern you eh uh eh occur to you that Eric might not be reliable ?
He then, and then he
And then he he, you know, the the the the dialogue that sprung up around that was, well see, he’s never going to get to get published
Well you’re just setting yourself up for wish fulfillment
You want him to be, persecuted, so you are ecstatic when he doesn’t get to publish, which is unfortunate for all the cancer patients, who really thought that one day, all the studies were going to be published
Where has Eric been wrong ?
It’s it’s it’s it’s a form letter
You know
They’re just saying, “No thanks”
“Thanks, but no thanks” is what they were saying, in the most generic way possible
Like I said, they’re besieged by researchers trying to publish
So, so, possibly
So possibly what you are saying is that they in fact have read it, and after having read it they’ve rejected it
Is that what you’re saying ?
Because that’s what peer-review is
Do you know it was the same editor, that it came from the same desk ?
You can’t make that assumption that that the form letter will be the same form letter every time
I mean you just can’t
I mean in in some ways we have a lot of non-information that you’re filling in, with what you expect, as as opposed to what’s actually really there, and I I I just think you’re putting too much uh stock in one uh, uh, in in in in this uh the publication kerfuffle
Um
Well, not necessarily
I’ve been in any # of professional groups where the organization is just not optimal, and publications certainly th there are all sorts of pressures from all sorts of different places
I I have no problems whatsoever with seeing that this might not be completely uh um uh streamlining uniform processes as possible
The fact that it’s not uniform, doesn’t have anything to do with Burzynski not publishing, not producing good data
Not just going to a, you know, god, even if, even if, let’s put it this way, even if he went to a pay to play type publication where you have to pay in order to get your manuscript accepted; and he has the money to do this, it wouldn’t take that much, and he were to put out a good protocol, and he were to show us his data, and he would make his, his his stuff accessible to us, then we could validate it, then we could look at it and say, “Yeah, this is good,” or “No, this is the problem, you have to go back and you have to fix this”
Right ?
So we really, every time we talk about the letter that he got, yeah that doesn’t have much to do with anything, really
We wanna see the frickin’ data
And if he had a cure for some cancers that otherwise don’t have reliable treatments, he has an obligation to get that out there anyway he can
And if if peer-review doesn’t, you know, play a, if peer-review can’t do it, you know, isn’t fast enough for him, then he should take it to the web, and he should send copies out to every pediatric, uh, you know, oncologist that there is
That’s the way to do it
Oh I, I I I certainly don’t think that he would put a lot of stock in it, but I, I, I know Dave Gorski enough, he wants this to work
He has patients who are dying, you know
And if if if let’s say that that Burzynski could get ah his gene-targeted therapy to work on breast cancer patients in in a reliable way, that would be, such a help to these people, that that Gorski’s trying to help
And, it it it doesn’t make sense, I mean, there, some of the best um, one of the the most important developments in medical history, was the development of of just washing your hands uh uh before uh uh going in and delivering a baby
Right ?
The guy who did it, was a colossal jerk, but it still worked and it’s the standard now
Right ?
Um, yea, it doesn’t matter now whether or not Burz, whether or not Gorski agrees with how Burzynski publishes
It’s the, it’s the data itself
If if Burzynski is is, is confident in his data, he will put it out there
Right ?
One way or the other
But he is a, the thing is, the thing is, you thing you have to understand is Gorski, Gorski is a genuine expert, in matters re re regarding on oncology studies
I mean, he has a
He, He’s able to convince people, he’s able to convince people, on the strength of his record, to give him money to carry out research
People who know what they’re talking about
To give him money to carry out his research
Right ?
Well what about all the other physicians, um, going back long before the Burzynski thing broke on-line
Of all these patients, with whom they have long-established relationships, and then doctors essentially after years, of treating these patients, basically saying, “I can’t work with you anymore if you go to Burzynski”
What about that ?
Di, are all of these doctors just as biased ?
Did he get burned at some point ?
We don’t know
Yeah, well, you wouldn’t expect Eric Merola to say that he got, that a doctor got burned
Would you ?
But he, he doesn’t have, he hasn’t given us his data
He’s given, he’s given, he’s given case studies
He’s done
Okay
Except for a ph, completed phase 3 clinical trial
Yeah
One of the things, one of the things that I’ve noticed going through these um, well, well there there is that
Uh, Guy Chapman, “It’s a blog, not a peer-reviewed publication”
Um, almost no treatment goes out without trials
Massive amounts of data are required
Um, so, it it is kind of, slightly disingenuous to hold uh Gorski to the same . . standard that you would, it on his blog
I think that professionally he would make, he he he would follow-up on these things, but u what I’ve noticed when you you mention these other people who are working with with Burzynski as co-investigators, the co- investigators don’t seem to have access to these, to these records
Um, you know, when they have to, when a patient has to, and often you have someone like a pediatrician, uh, signing on um uh to eh eh to work with with, uh and arrange care for patients when they’re out of state, away from Burzynski
Um, it’s it’s it’s often not an oncologist
It’s accurate to say that B Burzynski is not a board s uh certified oncologist
It’s accurate to say that no trial has been completed and fully published
Um, yeah it’s um, it it it if, all of the arguing on behalf of Burzynski doesn’t give him a single phase 3
It doesn’t give him um a uh uh of of a completed and and published phase 2
Uh, in in in that sense, you know, uh all the the the, you know, kind of back-peddling and and and trying to defend him is is going to, not going to help his case at all
You are, honestly as far as I can tell you are doing the um, you know, you’re you’re ah throwing up uh, uh, uh, you’re giving me another uh invisible dragon in the garage, um
What is the issue were not talking about
Yeah, but they
But they have track records that support the idea that you should trust them
Okay, so
What you’re telling me is that you trust the FDA to to be able to tell you when he’s not doing, good science, but also that you don’t trust the FDA
Do you see an inherent conflict there ?
Well, when I, whenever I would ask about, like, why would these trials aren’t happening uh and, you know, you say well the the FDA’s arranged it
The FDA’s in control
They sign off on these things
But they’re they’re they’re they’re at the same that they’re, they’re trustworthy they’re also not trustworthy depending on what you need for the particular argument at the time
You’re suggesting that they’re untrustworthy
I I would say that the the FDA has given Burzynski every opportunity for decades
Every opportunity
When he didn’t have r r really, he got special treatment as far as I can tell
Uh, the, I’m rather stunned every morning I wake up and don’t see in the paper, that that place has has been closed down
I, I really am
Uh, so, you know, that one doesn’t really fly with me either
Um
Do you know that the FDA pulled out of the prosecution ?
Did you know that the FDA pulled out of the prosecution um of his criminal case, because they were backing a researcher ?
Yeah, the the the it wasn’t the FDA who was pressing charges, it was a Federal prosecutor
Right
And and, they declined to provide information that the prosecution needed
That’s important
That that that’s really important
That he has been given the benefit of the doubt, and he has come up wanting, for decades now
The, no, claims works
He claims works
One of the things I think
One of the things that I think is happening here
One of the things I think is happening here, is that lots of people have worked with Burzynski and then have stopped working with B Burzynski
Uh, you know, uh lots of uh uh uh these partnerships do not seem to work out in the end
I often wonder, if the uh, the way that these things are, are are playing out, because it’s s so reliable that they’re, that these partnerships are going to fail, I I wonder if th they are designed in such a way, that for instance, um a, uh, a a partner would be uncomfortable working
with him
Or um or that the specifications for what it takes to enter one of these trials is so high, that nobody will ever enter the trials
I mean, I wonder if they are, what, especially, like why hasn’t Burzynski left the country ?
That’s what I want to know
Exactly
If he was so, if he was s so persecuted and really cares about getting his treatment out to the world, why wouldn’t he ?
They’re, they’re lots of things going on here
David James has pointed this out, that a lot of questions I’m asking are not going answered
“I still don’t know how long it would take before you would have any doubts about Burzynski”
“I still have no idea, how often we can see patients reporting that signs of getting worse are getting better, before you would change your mind”
I’ve made it very clear that he just needs to have a completed study published and replicated before I support his right to go out and charge people what he’s charging for these, for these drugs, and I’m I’m just not seeing that here with you, and I I wonder what could come from, and don’t worry I will go to your site and I will comment on on on what you’ve run
Um, but, you know, I I I I it’s hard for Skeptics to imagine, what could be gained from engaging with you, if there seems to be no conceivable way, that we can, one, get a straight answer for, how many patients will have to report that getting worse is getting better before you starting doubting your opinion, or, uh, how many uh, uh, how many years does this have to go on before you decide that, “No, we probably just can’t produce the goods”
One of the interesting things about Doubting Thomas that I think you should definitely consider for yourself, is that at some point, when faced with the real opportunity to prove or disprove his assertions, he doubted himself
And that’s important
And that’s where you’re falling short in the analogy
I’ve laid out exactly what it would take for me to turn on a fucking dime
I have, I have made it abundantly clear what I need
Gorski has made it abundantly clear
Everybody else, Guy, and David, and Josephine Jones, uh, the Morgans, all of them have made it abundantly clear, what it would take to change our minds, and you’ve never done that
And even in this, this was an opportunity to do that
To come up with a basis for understanding, where it’s like, you know what, If we can show this, you know, if we can show a this guy, that, that, there, that his standards are not being met, then, you know, we could possibly have some sort of ongoing dialogue after this
Why wasn’t that study
Why wasn’t that , that that that, still . . again, it it doesn’t seem really to to approach the the the, main question here
You know, um . . what are the standards that you have that it isn’t, what are your standards to show that it isn’t efficacious ?
Why was the Mayo
Why was the Mayo study delayed ?
Well you said you had so many years before you finish it and go in
Why, why did it take so long ?
I have something for you, okay ?
Send me that
Could you send me that study the way that it was published because um, just just send me the final study, um, to my e-mail address
Um, because, I can ask that question of those researchers, why was this study in this time, and what happened in-between
Why did it take so long for it, for it to come out
Right
Um, but it it would, perhaps, answer the question; because you’re using it as an example on the basis of which to dismiss criticism, whether or not, uh, it is the standard, and therefor you’re allowed to accept that Burzynski hasn’t published until 2016, or, um, it’s an anomaly, which is also a possibility, that most stuff comes out more quickly
I I, yeah, the other thing that David James points out is, you know, why 2016 when he’s had 36 years already ?
Treating people
You would expect the Burzynski Patient Group to be a lot bigger after 36 years, and in fact is
So, if you’re unsure about this stuff, if you’re unsure about the the time to publication, why are you defending it so hard, other than saying, “I don’t know, I really need to”
Uh about the
The reasons, the reasons for which that he’s, no, why are you defending him so hard, when you’re unsure ?
I’ve backed-up everything that
Every time that I’ve tried
and then other people
Way back
It is about
It is about as efficacious
Yeah, I’ve, and and I based that on a a a that type of thing
You, you, you can read that how you want, right ?
There
He does have the accent though
Right ?
No
Alright ?
No, but listen, like, it it it’s not, it, we we don’t understand why you defend himself so hard, when there is such a paucity of of of information out there
Um
Even if it’s true or false you, honestly though
Even if it’s true or false, in in that particular instance, you know, eh let’s just say that you’re right
Gorski gets that point completely wrong
It has no bearing on whether or not, ANP works
That’s a Red Herring
You’re just focusing on this, on this little niggly stuff, where the real question, is does it work ?
Are patients getting better at a better rate then not
or otherwise ?
We’re were talking about whether or not there’s evidence to suggest it works
The FDA, see that’s the thing
You, the FDA are are, you know, you invest them with, we’re just, we’re just circling around again
Uh um, alright
Well, this has gone on for rather a, longer than I thought it would
Um, I, uh, wanna thank you for coming on here
I wasn’t sure that you would actually do it
Um, I’m glad that you did
I’m glad that we talked
Um, I will look at your web-site, and we will, uh, we, uh, you, oh make sure that I I go to your blog and and I talk there
Um
Please do
And I will look at those
Maybe not in the next few days; I’ve got a lot going on but
Alright
Um
I don’t think he is
I don’t think he’s afraid
I just think he’s got a lot going on
He is act, a full-time surgical oncologist and researcher
He does have insane am, he has to pick and choose his battles
And if, if if he saw that we were going to ultimately be circling around our same arguments again and again; kind of like we’ve done here, um, he uh, you, he doesn’t have time for that, I don’t think
Alright
I I would ask that you to to go back over The The Other Burzynski Patient Group and take their stories seriously, because they deserve at least the same amount of consideration that the survivors do
That’s my
That’s my kids, okay
Well, Thanks for much for talking
I greatly appreciate it
Alright
Take it easy

Critiquing: Quackwatch: Stanislaw Burzynski and “Antineoplastons” – Saul Green, Ph.D.

[1] – Quackwatch has this article which claims, in part:

“Tracing the biochemistry involved in Burzynski’s synthesis of antineoplastons shows that the substances are without value for cancer treatment”

Burzynski has never demonstrated that A-2.1 (PA) or “soluble A-10″ (PA and PAG) are effective against cancer or that tumor cells from patients treated with these antineoplastons have been “normalized.””

“Tests of antineoplastons at the National Cancer Institute have never been positive”

“The drug company Sigma-Tau Pharmaceuticals could not duplicate Burzynski’s claims for AS-2.1 and A-10

“The Japanese National Cancer Institute has reported that antineoplastons did not work in their studies”

“These facts indicate to me that Burzynski’s claims that his “antineoplastons” are effective against cancer are not credible”

About the Author

Dr. Green (1925-2007) was a biochemist who did cancer research at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center for 23 years

He consulted on scientific methodology and had a special interest in unproven methods

This article was adapted from his presentation at the American Association for Clinical Chemistry Symposium in Atlanta in July 1997

This page was revised on January 19, 2013
====================================
Interestingly, the above article does NOT provide any specific citation(s), reference(s), or link(s) to support any of these claims
——————————————————————
[2] – 10/4/1991 – Five doctors (3 from the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Branch (CTEP); including the Head of the Quality Assurance and Compliance Section, Regulatory Affairs Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Department of Health &Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, and 2 invited consultants; including one from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center) visited the offices of Dr. Stanislaw R. Burzynski
——————————————————————
[3] – 10/31/1991 – Michael A. Friedman, M.D. Associate Director, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), Department of Health &Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, sent a one page Memorandum to Bruce A. Chabner, M.D., Director, Division of Cancer Treatment, which stated, in part:

“I thought you would be interested in this for several reasons:”

“3. Antineoplastons deserve a closer look”

“It turns out that the agents are well defined, pure chemical entities
=======================================
=======================================
“The human brain tumor responses are real”

20130911-102213.jpg
=======================================
[4] – 11/15/1991 – Michael J. Hawkins, M.D., Chief, Investigational Drug Branch, Department of Health &Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, sent a 7 page letter to Decision Network, which stated, in part, on page one:
=======================================
=======================================
“It was the opinion of the site visit team that antitumor activity was documented in this best case series … “

20130911-122216.jpg
=======================================
[5] – 12/2/91 – NCI (National Cancer Institute), Decision Network Report on Antineoplastons, states in part, on page 11:
=======================================
=======================================
“The site visit team determined that antitumor activity was documented in this best case series … “

20130911-134634.jpg
=======================================
[6] – CANCER FACTS
National Cancer Institute • National Institutes of Health Department of Health and Human Services, Antineoplastons, pg. 1

=======================================
=======================================
“The reviewers of this series found evidence of antitumor activity … “

20130911-094155.jpg
=======================================
[7] – Page 1 of 6, BlueCross BlueShield of Alabama, Antineoplaston Cancer Therapy, Policy #: 280, Category: Medicine, states, in part, on page 2 of 6:

Key Points:
=======================================
=======================================
“The reviewers of this series found evidence of antitumor activity … “
=======================================
=======================================
[8] – ANTINEOPLASTON THERAPY, HS-183, pg. 2
=======================================
=======================================
“After the reviewers found some evidence of antitumor activity … “
=======================================
=======================================
These facts indicate to me that Quackwatch, and Saul Green’s claims about “antineoplastons”, are “not credible”

Maybe they should have learned how to use the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
=======================================
REFERENCES:
=======================================
[1] – Stanislaw Burzynski and “Antineoplastons”
Saul Green, Ph.D.

——————————————————————
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/burzynski1.html
=======================================
[6]
——————————————————————
http://www.emory.edu/KomenEd/PDF/Treatment/Antineoplastons.pdf
=======================================
[7]
——————————————————————
https://www.bcbsal.org/providers/policies/final/280.pdf
=======================================
[8]
——————————————————————
https://www.wellcare.com/WCAssets/corporate/assets/HS183_Antineoplaston_Therapy.pdf
=======================================

Burzynski: Oh, RATS!!!

After again showing how questionable the “research” of #ScienceBasedMedicine Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski is:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/is-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-down-and-out-in-detroit-and-an-ethically-bankrupt-researcher-2/
and he is involved in the “War on Cancer,”(!!!) I decided to provide this more in-depth listing of Burzynski related scientific publications regarding animal, mice, and rat studies re: antineoplastons
——————————————————————
1983 – Burzynski SR, Hendry LB, Mohabbat MO, et al. Purification of structure determination, synthesis and animal toxicity studies of antineoplaston A10. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Chemotherapy. Vienna, Austria; 1983:17, PS. 12.4 11-4.
——————————————————————
1984 – Burzynski, S.R., Mohabbat MO, Burzynski B.
Animal toxicology studies on oral formulation of antineoplaston A10
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1984;10:113-118
——————————————————————
1984 – Lee, S.S., Mohabbat, M.O., Burzynski, S.R.
Tissue culture and animal toxicity studies of antineoplaston A2
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1984;10:607-610
——————————————————————
1985 – Lee, S.S., Mohabbat, M.O., Burzynski, S.R.
Tissue culture and acute animal toxicity studies of antineoplaston A2
Future Trends in Chemotherapy 1985;6:481-484
——————————————————————
1986 – Burzynski, S., Mohabbat. M., Lee, S.
Preclinical studies of antineoplaston AS2-1 in mice with oral administration
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1986;132
——————————————————————
1986 – Burzynski, S. R., Mohabbat, M. O. , Le e, S. S. Pre clinical studies of antineoplaston AS2-1 and antineoplaston AS2-5
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1986;12 (suppl1):11-16
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3743376/
Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1986;12 Suppl 1:11-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3743376/
——————————————————————
1986 – Ashraf, AQ., Liau, M.C., Mohabbat, M.O., Burzynski, S.R.
Preclinical studies of antineoplaston A10 injections.
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1986;12 (suppl 1):37-45.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3743379/
Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1986;12 Suppl 1:37-45.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3743379/
——————————————————————
1986 – Burzynski, S.R., Mohabbat M.O.
Chronic animal toxicity studies on antineoplaston A2.
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1986;12 (suppl 1):73-75.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3743382/
Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1986;12 Suppl 1:73-5.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3743382/
——————————————————————
1987 – Lee, S.S., Mohabbat, M.O., Burzynski, SR
In vitro cancer growth inhibition and animal toxicity studies of antineoplaston A3
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1987;13 (suppl1):13-16
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3569011/
Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1987;13 Suppl 1:13-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3569011/
——————————————————————
1987 – Lee, S.S., Burzynski, S.R
Tissue culture and animal toxicity studies of antineoplaston A5
Drugs Exptl Clin Res 1987;13 (suppl 1):31-5.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3569013/
Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1987;13 Suppl 1:31-5.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3569013/
——————————————————————
1987 – Ashraf AQ, Liau MC, Kampalath BN, et al. Pharmacokinetic study of radioactive antineoplaston A10 following oral administration in rats. Drugs Exptl Clin Res. 1987;13(suppl 1):45-50.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3569015/
�
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3569015/
——————————————————————
1988 – Ashraf, AQ., Kampalath, B.N., Burzynski, S.R
Pharmacokinetic analysis of antineoplaston A10 injections following intravenous administration in rats
Adv Exptl Clin Chemother 1988;6:33-39
http://www.encognitive.com/node/2449
——————————————————————
7/20/1988 – Chemopreventive effect of antineoplaston A-10 on urethane-induced pulmonary neoplasm in mice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3183462
Nihon Gan Chiryo Gakkai Shi. 1988 Jul.20; 23 (7):1560-5
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3183462
23(7):1560-5 (1988)
Tsuda
N E
——————————————————————
1/20/1990 – A-10 Injection – The anticancer effect of antineoplaston A-10 on human breast cancer serially transplanted to athymic mice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2157780
Nihon Gan Chiryo Gakkai Shi. 1990 Jan 20;25(1):1-5
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/2157780
1st Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine
The Anticancer Effect of Antineoplaston A-10 on Human Breast Cancer Serially Transplanted to Athymic Mice, Journal of the Japan Society for Cancer Therapy 25(1):1-5 (1990)
Hashimoto K, Koga T, Shintomi Y, Tanaka M, Kakegawa T, Tsuda H, Hara H.
http://www.abstractboard.com/abstract/2157780/The-anticancer-effect-of-antineoplaston-A-10-on-human-breast-cancer-serially-transplanted-to-athymic.html
——————————————————————
1990 – Inhibitory effect of antineoplaston A-10 on breast cancer transplanted to athymic mice and human hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines. The members of Antineoplaston Study Group
Tsuda H (Japan) et al
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2175003
Kurume Med J. 1990;37(2):97-104
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/2175003
Kurume Med J 37 (2):97-104 (1990)
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/37/2/37_2_97/_article
Kurume University School of Medicine, Japan
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/37/2/37_2_97/_article/references
Burzynski References: 1 – 8 and 11 – 14
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/37/2/37_2_97/_pdf
The Kurume Medical Journal
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/abstract
J-STAGE, Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic
http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/130000888719
——————————————————————
1991 – Inhibitory effect of orally administered antineoplaston A10 on the growth curve of human breast cancer transplanted to athymic mice
http://jglobal.jst.go.jp/public/20090422/200902015871267390
J Jpn Soc Cancer Ther 26:595-601, 1991
26:3:595-601:1991 03
Kurume Univ. School of Medicine
NISHIDA H, YOSHIDA H, KUBOTA H
——————————————————————
5/1992 – The inhibitory effect of the combination of antineoplaston A-10 injection with a small dose of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum on cell and tumor growth of human hepatocellular carcinoma
H TSUDA, et al (Japan)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1377669
The Inhibitory Effect of the Combination of Antineoplaston A-10 Injection with a Small Dose of cis-Diamminedichloroplatinum on Cell and Tumor Growth of Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/1377669
Jpn J Cancer Res. 1992 May;83(5):527-31
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/abstract
Jpn. J. Cancer Res. 83, 527-531
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/asset/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x.pdf?v=1&t=hd97ht7z&s=3481466c7830e5f8e2bb925a698de6f8155da747
Jpn J Cancer Res. 1992 May;83 (5):527-31
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/asset/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x.pdf;jsessionid=4ECD3F595A3971B5AB87763862867844.d03t02?v=1&t=hbmd55gj&s=a14b626a37db3ecd558109cee30dfe26c71827763862867844
Jpn J Cancer Res 83 (5):527-31 (1992)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/asset/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x.pdf?v=1&t=hkfile3i&s=2756f110cf2202084cfc90a3715d8f1f9df7774c
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume University, School of Medicine, Fukuoka-ken
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/asset/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x.pdf?v=1&t=hdcl29bl&s=dd78f02b92e0f5544c136e7b897a7d65bcf5dc71&systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+disrupted+on+23+February+from+10%3A00-12%3A00+BST+%2805%3A00-07%3A00+EDT%29+for+essential+maintenance
Article first published online: 26 AUG 2005
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x
Japan Journal Cancer Research
Cancer Science, Wiley Online Library
Volume 83, Issue 5, pages 527–531, May 1992
Burzynski References: 1, 4 – 7 and 9
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/references
Nishida (Japan) A-10 Reference: 2
——————————————————————
11/15/1995 – Sodium PHENYLACETATE Induces Growth Inhibition and Bcl-2 Down-Regulation and Apoptosis in MCF7ras Cells in Vitro and in nude mice
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/55/22/5156.abstract?sid=29b3d08f-4e59-473c-a804-10c68ed99112
Cancer Res. 1995 Nov 15;55(22):5156-60.
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/55/22/5156.full.pdf
Institut d’Oncologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire Humaine, Bobigny, France.
http://m.cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/55/22/5156.full.pdf#page=1
References:
http://m.cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/55/22/5156
1. SAMID, D., Shac, S., and Sherman, L. T. Phenylacetate: a novel nontoxic inducer of tumor cell differentiation. Cancer Res., 52: 1988-1992, 1992
http://www.naderlibrary.com/burzynski.screen3.htm
——————————————————————
9/2001 – Sodium PHENYLACETATE enhances the inhibitory effect of dextran derivative on breast cancer cell growth in vitro and in nude mice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2375080
Br J Cancer. 2001 September; 85(6): 917–923.
doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1993
PMCID: PMC2375080
——————————————————————
3/2005 Effects of antineoplaston AS2-1 against post-operative lung metastasis in orthotopically implanted colon cancer in nude rat
Hideaki TSUDA
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15706406
Oncol Rep. 2005 Mar; 13 (3):389-95
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15706406
Oncol Rep 13 (3): 389-95 (2005)
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/13/3/389
Oncology Reports, 3/2005, Volume 13 Number 3
Pages: 389-395 Oncology Reports, Spandidos Publications
Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume City, Fukuoka, Japan
——————————————————————
7 – 8/27/2007 Induction of apoptosis in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells by synthetic antineoplaston A10
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17695534
Induction of Apoptosis in Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells by Synthetic Antineoplaston A10
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17695534
Anticancer Res. 2007 Jul-Aug;27(4B):2427-31
http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.short
Anticancer Res 27(4B):2427-31 (2007)
http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.long
Anticancer Res. 7 – 8/2007; 27(4B):2427-31
http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.full.pdf
Anticancer Research, Vol. 27, No. 4B, 2007, pp. 2427-2431
http://www.iiar-anticancer.org/main.php?pid=3398&id=2&ch=52&gch=&volume=27&issue=4B&show=details&page=2
Anticancer Research
HighWire Press
School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Shandong University, Jinan, Japan
International Journal of Cancer Treatment
Burzynski References: 1, 3, 5, 13 and 15
Badria (Egypt) A-10 References: 2 and 20
Wang A10 Reference: 4
�
References:
�
Adam L, Crépin M, Savin C, Israël L. Sodium phenylacetate induces growth inhibition and Bcl-2 down-regulation and apoptosis in MCF7ras cells in vitro and in nude mice. Cancer Res. 1995 Nov 15;55(22):5156–5160.
�
Shack S, Miller A, Liu L, Prasanna P, Thibault A, SAMID D. Vulnerability of multidrug-resistant tumor cells to the aromatic fatty acids phenylacetate and phenylbutyrate. Clin Cancer Res. 1996 May;2(5):865–872.
�
SAMID D, Shack S, Myers CE. Selective growth arrest and phenotypic reversion of prostate cancer cells in vitro by nontoxic pharmacological concentrations of phenylacetate. J Clin Invest. 1993 May;91(5):2288–2295.
�
SAMID D, Hudgins WR, Shack S, Liu L, Prasanna P, Myers CE. Phenylacetate and Phenylbutyrate as novel, nontoxic differentiation inducers. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1997;400A:501–505.
�
SAMID D, Wells M, Greene ME, Shen W, Palmer CN, Thibault A. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma as a novel target in cancer therapy: binding and activation by an aromatic fatty acid with clinical antitumor activity. Clin Cancer Res. 2000 Mar;6(3):933–941.
�
Thibault A, Cooper MR, Figg WD, Venzon DJ, Sartor AO, Tompkins AC, Weinberger MS, Headlee DJ, McCall NA, SAMID D, et al. A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of intravenous phenylacetate
in patients with cancer. Cancer Res. 1994 Apr 1;54(7):1690–1694.
——————————————————————
3/2005 – Effects of antineoplaston AS2-1 against post-operative lung metastasis in orthotopically implanted colon cancer in nude rat.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15706406
Matono K, Ogata Y, Tsuda H, Araki Y, Shirouzu K.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15706406
Oncol Rep. 2005 Mar;13(3):389-95
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/13/3/389
Oncology Reports
March 2005
Volume 13 Number 3
Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume City, Fukuoka, Japan
——————————————————————
PUBLICATIONS BY STANISLAW RAJMUND BURZYNSKI AND ASSOCIATES
http://www.cancermed.com
——————————————————————
(former web-site screenshots)
http://www.circare.org/info/bri/burzynski_fdauntitled_promo_2012.pdf
——————————————————————
Stanislaw Rajmund Burzynski Publications:

https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/16/stanislaw-rajmund-burzynski-publications/

Burzynski: Japan antineoplaston publications

7/20/1988 – Chemopreventive effect of antineoplaston A-10 on urethane-induced pulmonary neoplasm in mice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3183462
Tsuda
N E
Nihon Gan Chiryo Gakkai Shi. 1988 Jul.20; 23 (7):1560-5
23(7):1560-5 (1988)
Nihon Gan Chiryo Gakkai Shi

1/20/1990 – A-10 Injection – The anticancer effect of antineoplaston A-10 on human breast cancer serially transplanted to athymic mice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/2157780
Nihon Gan Chiryo Gakkai Shi. 1990 Jan 20;25(1):1-5
1990 Tsuda (Japan) et al published with The members of Antineoplaston Study Group
Kurume Med J. 1990;37(2):97-104
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2175003
Burzynski References: 1 – 8 and 11 – 14
Abstract:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/37/2/37_2_97/_article
References:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/37/2/37_2_97/_article/references
PDF
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/37/2/37_2_97/_pdf
5/1992 Tsuda (Japan) publishes re A-10 Injection:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/1377669
Burzynski References: 1, 4 – 7 and 9
Nishida (Japan) A-10 Reference: 2
Abstract:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/abstract
References:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/references
PDF
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/asset/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x.pdf?v=1&t=hdcl29bl&s=dd78f02b92e0f5544c136e7b897a7d65bcf5dc71&systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+disrupted+on+23+February+from+10%3A00-12%3A00+BST+%2805%3A00-07%3A00+EDT%29+for+essential+maintenance
5/1995 Tsuda (Japan) publishes re Antineoplaston:
Kurume Med J. 1995;42(3):133-40
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/7474850
Burzynski References: 1 – 2 and 4
Samid Reference: 7 (who learned from Burzynski re Phenylacetate)
Lee (Japan) A-10 Reference: 3
Nishidi (Japan) A-10 Reference: 6
Abstract:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/3/42_3_133/_article
References:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/3/42_3_133/_article/references
PDF
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/3/42_3_133/_pdf
1995 Tsuda (Japan) publishes re A-10 and AS2-1:
Kurume Med J. 1995;42(4):241-9
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8667595
Burzynski References: 1 – 3 and 5
Nishida et al. (Japan) A-10 Reference: 4 and 7
Muldoon et al. A-10 Reference: 6
Abstract:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/4/42_4_241/_article
References:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/4/42_4_241/_article/references
PDF
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/4/42_4_241/_pdf
1996 Tsuda (Japan) publishes re A10 and AS2-1:
Kurume Med J. 1996;43(2):137-47
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8755117
Burzynski References: 1 – 3, 5 and 7
Samid Reference: 13 (who learned from Burzynski re Phenylacetate)
Nishida et al. (Japan) A10 Reference: 4 and 10
Muldoon et al. A10 Reference: 8
Abstract:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_article
References:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_article/references
PDF
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_pdf
7 – 8/2007 (Japan) publishes re A10:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17695534
Burzynski References: 1, 3, 5, 13 and 15
Badria (Egypt) A-10 References: 2 and 20
Wang A10 Reference: 4
http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.short
Abstract:
http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.long
PDF
http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.full.pdf
1/2008 (Japan) publishes re antineoplaston:
Breast Cancer. 2008;15(1):73-8. doi: 10.1007/s12282-007-0015-y
Breast Cancer: January 2008, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 73-78
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18224398
Burzynski Reference: 12
Tsuda (Japan) Antineoplaston Reference: 13
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12282-007-0015-y

1990 – Inhibitory effect of antineoplaston A-10 on breast cancer transplanted to athymic mice and human hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/2175003
H TSUDA
Kurume University School of Medicine, Japan
Kurume Med J 37 (2):97-104 (1990)
Kurume Medical Journal
J-STAGE, Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/37/2/37_2_97/_article

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/abstract

http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/130000888719

1991 – Inhibitory effect of orally administered antineoplaston A10 on the growth curve of human breast cancer transplanted to athymic mice
J Jpn Soc Cancer Ther 26:595-601, 1991

1992 – antineoplaston – Prevention of drug induced DNA hypermethylation by antineoplaston components
LIAU M C
Intl J Exp Clin Chemother 1992; 5:19-27
https://data.epo.org/publication-server/pdf-document?PN=EP0680756%20EP%200680756&iDocId=4830495&iepatch=.pdf

http://eng.med.wanfangdata.com.cn/PaperDetail.aspx?qkid=zgzllc-e&qcode=zgzllc-e200504004

http://so.med.wanfangdata.com.cn/ViewHTML/PeriodicalPaper_zgzllc-e200504004.aspx

5/1992 – The inhibitory effect of the combination of antineoplaston A-10 injection with a small dose of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum on cell and tumor growth of human hepatocellular carcinoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/1377669
The Inhibitory Effect of the Combination of Antineoplaston A-10 Injection with a Small Dose of cis-Diamminedichloroplatinum on Cell and Tumor Growth of Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma
H TSUDA
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume University, School of Medicine, Fukuoka-ken
Jpn J Cancer Res. 1992 May;83(5):527-31
Jpn. J. Cancer Res. 83, 527-531
Jpn J Cancer Res. 1992 May;83 (5):527-31
Jpn J Cancer Res 83 (5):527-31 (1992)
Article first published online: 26 AUG 2005
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x
Japan Journal Cancer Research
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/asset/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x.pdf?v=1&t=hd97ht7z&s=3481466c7830e5f8e2bb925a698de6f8155da747

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x/asset/j.1349-7006.1992.tb01960.x.pdf;jsessionid=4ECD3F595A3971B5AB87763862867844.d03t02?v=1&t=hbmd55gj&s=a14b626a37db3ecd558109cee30dfe26c71827763862867844
Cancer Science
Cancer …, Wiley Online Library
2003 – AS2-1 –
Oncology …,
The preventive effect of antineoplaston AS2-1 on HCC recurrence

1995 – (Clinically tested) – The effect of Antineoplaston, a new antitumor agent on malignant brain tumors
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/7474850
H H TSUDA
Department of Neurosurgery, Kurume University School of Medicine, Japan
Kurume Med J. 1995;42(3):133-40
Kurume Med J 42(3):133-40 (1995)
Kurume Medical Journal
J-STAGE, Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic

1995 – Toxicological study on antineoplastons A-10 and AS2-1 in cancer patients
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8667595
H Tsuda
Kurume Med J 42 (4):241-9 (1995)
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Japanu
Kurume Med Journal
J-STAGE, Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/4/42_4_241/_article

http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/42/4/42_4_241/_pdf

1996 – Inhibitory effect of antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 on human hepatocellular carcinoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8755117
Tsuda H
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Japan
Kurume Med J 43 (2):137-47 (1996)
J-STAGE, Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_article

http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_pdf

11-12/1997 – phase I clinical trial – Antineoplaston AS2-1 for maintenance therapy in liver cancer
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21590224
H Tsuda
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21590224
KURUME UNIV,SCH MED,DEPT SURG,KURUME,FUKUOKA,JAPAN. KURUME UNIV,SCH MED,DEPT INTERNAL MED,KURUME,FUKUOKA,JAPAN. KURUME UNIV,SCH MED,DEPT RADIOL,KURUME,FUKUOKA,JAPAN
4 (6):1213-6
Oncol Rep. 1997 Nov-Dec;4(6):1213-6
Oncol Rep. 1997; 4:1213- 1216
Oncol Rep 4 (6):1213-6 (1997)
Oncology Reports
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/4/6/1213

5 – 6/1998 – A10 and AS2-1 – I – Quick response of advanced cancer to chemoradiation therapy with antineoplastons
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9538158
H Tsuda
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9538158
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume University, School of Medicine, Kurumeshi, Fukuokaken, Japan
5 (3):597-600
Oncol. Rep. 1998;5:597–600
Oncol Rep. 1998 May-Jun;5 (3):597-600
Oncol Rep 5 (3):597-600 (1998)
Oncology Reports
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/5/3/597

11-12/1998 – A10 I – I – Antineoplaston treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9769368
H Tsuda
Department of Radiology, Kumabe Hospital, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurumeshi, Fukuokaken, Japan
5 (6):1363-7
Oncol Rep. 1998;5:1363-1367
Oncol Rep. 1998 Nov-Dec;5 (6):1363-7
Oncol Rep 5 (6):1363-7 (1998)
Oncology Reports, Spandidos Publications
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/5/6/1363

2002 – Inhibitory effect of antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 on human hepatocellular carcinoma
H TSUDA
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Japan
43 (2):137-47 PMID 8755117
J-STAGE, Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_article

http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_pdf

2002 – A10 & AS2-1 – A novel strategy for remission induction and maintenance in cancer therapy
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/11748457
H Tsuda
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume University, School of Medicine, Fukuoka-ken , Japan
mx2.tiki.ne.jp
Oncol Rep 2002;9:65–8
Oncol. Rep. 2002;9:65-68
Oncol Rep 9(1):65-8 (2002)
Oncology Reports, Spandidos Publications
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/9/1/65

2002 -The preventive effect of antineoplaston AS2-1 on HCC recurrence
Tsuda
Oncology Reports 2002; 10: 391-397
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/964.pdf

2003 – Long-term survival following treatment with antineoplastons for colon cancer with unresectable multiple liver metastases: report of a case
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12768372
TSUDA H
Surg Today 2003
http://www.springerlink.com/content/b48ch3ha165nbrqp

http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200313/000020031303A0389449.php

http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10015483373

3 – 4/2003 – Phase II Clinical Trial – The preventive effect of antineoplaston AS2-1 on HCC recurrence
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12579278
Hideaki H TSUDA
Department of Anesthesiology, Kurume Daiichi Social Insurance Hospital, Kushihara Kurumeshi, Fukuoka, Japan
Oncol Rep. 2003 Mar-Apr;10(2):391-7
Oncol Rep 10 (2):391-7 (2003)
Oncol Rep 2003;10:391–7
Oncol Rep. 2003;10:391-397
Oncology Reports
Spandidos Publications
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/10/2/391

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10595-002-2503-2?LI=true

6/2003 – A10 & AS2-1 – Phase II Clinical Trial – Long-Term Survival Following Treatment with Antineoplastons for Colon Cancer with Unresectable Multiple Liver Metastases:
Report of a Case
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12768372
Hideaki Tsuda
Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka, Japan
Surg Today. 2003;33(6):448-53
Surg Today 2003; 33:448–53
Surg Today. 2003; 33:448-453
33 (6):448-53
DOI: 10.1007/s10595-002-2503-2
Surgery Today, Springer

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10595-002-2503-2

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10595-002-2503-2?LI=true

http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10595-002-2503-2

http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200313/000020031303A0389449.php

http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10015483373

9/2003 – [Anti-proliferative effects of biochemical defense modifier antineoplaston in colorectal carcinoma]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/14574945
Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine
61 Suppl 7:505-9
Nihon Rinsho (2003)
Nihon Rinsho. 2003 Sep; 61 Suppl 7:505-9 Article in Japanese

2004 -Analysis of cell growth inhibitory effects of antineoplaston through MAPK in human breast cancer cell line SKBR-3
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/14755017
TSUDA
EJC Supplements 2 (3): 2 (2004),
DOI: 10.1016/S1359-6349(04)90794-X
The Oncologist, AlphaMed Press
Complementary and alternative therapies for cancer
http://m.theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/1/80.short

http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org

http://m.theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/1/80.long

http://m.theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/1/80.full.pdf

http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/1/80.full?sid=09bf7d6b-2d6c-4097-a48d-ef768e65569b

http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/1/80.full.pdf?sid=30deadf2-7850-4ea2-9760-664ceee77eed

http://www.oncocure.ca/assets/byTopic/IntegrativeOncology/2-CAM%20Therapies%20in%20CA-Oncologist%202004.pdf

http://intl-cme.alphamedpress.org/cgi/hierarchy/ampcme_course;91080

http://cme.alphamedpress.org/cgi/hierarchy/ampcme_course;91080

http://www.integratedhealthclinic.com/assets/byTopic/IntegrativeOncology/2-CAM%20Therapies%20in%20CA-Oncologist%202004.pdf

http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/1/80.full?sid=09bf7d6b-2d6c-4097-a48d-ef768e65569b

http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/1/80.full.pdf?sid=30deadf2-7850-4ea2-9760-664ceee77eed

http://www.oncocure.ca/assets/byTopic/IntegrativeOncology/2-CAM%20Therapies%20in%20CA-Oncologist%202004.pdf

http://intl-cme.alphamedpress.org/cgi/hierarchy/ampcme_course;91080

http://cme.alphamedpress.org/cgi/hierarchy/ampcme_course;91080

http://www.integratedhealthclinic.com/assets/byTopic/IntegrativeOncology/2-CAM%20Therapies%20in%20CA-Oncologist%202004.pdf

2005 – Effects of antineoplaston AS2-1 against post-operative lung metastasis in orthotopically implanted colon cancer in nude rat
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15706406
Tsuda H
Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume City, Fukuoka, Japan
Oncol Rep. 2005 Mar;13(3):389-95
Oncology …,

3/2005 – Effects of antineoplaston AS2-1 against post-operative lung metastasis in orthotopically implanted colon cancer in nude rat
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15706406
Hideaki TSUDA
Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume City, Fukuoka, Japan
Oncol Rep 13 (3): 389-95 (2005)
Oncol Rep. 2005 Mar; 13 (3):389-95
Oncology Reports, 3/2005, Volume 13 Number 3
Pages: 389-395 Oncology Reports, Spandidos Publications
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/13/3/389

8/2005 – Antineoplaston A10 – Antineoplaston induces G1 arrest by PKCα and MAPK pathway in SKBR-3 breast cancer cells
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16012735
Antineoplaston induces G1 arrest by PKCo and MAPK pathway in SKBR-3 breast cancer cells
Antineoplaston induces G(1) arrest by PKCalpha and MAPK pathway in SKBR-3 breast cancer cells
Hideaki H TSUDA
Department of Surgery, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka, Japan
med.kurume-u.ac.jp
Oncol Rep 14(2):489-94 (2005)
Oncol Rep. 8/2005; 14(2):489-94
Oncology Reports, 8/2005, Volume 14 Number 2
Pages: 489-494
Oncol Rep. 2005; 14:489–94
Oncol. Rep. 14, 489–494
Oncology .Reports, Spandidos Publications
http://www.spandidos-publications.com/or/14/2/489

http://gyouseki.kurume-u.ac.jp/PDF/ichiran_2005.pdf

http://research.kurume-u.ac.jp/K90RES.php?scode=49485632873864

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/iub.574/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/iub.574/full

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1002/iub.574/asset/574_ftp.pdf?v=1&t=hbr9z60q&s=0b1c1e8655db9c54b45dbf72062e8b11cb7895ac

2006 – Inhibitory Effect of Antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 on Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8755117
TSUDA
med.kurume-u.ac.jp
Kurume Medical Journal
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_article

http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj1954/43/2/43_2_137/_pdf

7 – 8/27/2007 – Induction of apoptosis in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells by synthetic antineoplaston A10
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17695534
Induction of Apoptosis in Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells by Synthetic Antineoplaston A10,
School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Shandong University, Jinan, Japan
Anticancer Research, Vol. 27, No. 4B, 2007, pp. 2427-2431
Anticancer Res 27(4B):2427-31 (2007)
Anticancer Res. 7 – 8/2007; 27(4B):2427-31
Anticancer Research
International Journal of Cancer Treatment
HighWire Press
http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.short

http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.long

http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/27/4B/2427.full.pdf

http://www.iiar-anticancer.org/main.php?pid=3398&id=2&ch=52&gch=&volume=27&issue=4B&show=details&page=2

1/2008 – antineoplaston – Preclinical studies of molecular-targeting diagnostic and therapeutic strategies against breast cancer
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18224398
15(1):73-8
Department of Surgery, Kurume University, Fukuoka, Japan
Breast Cancer 15(1):73-8 (2008)
DOI: 10.1007/s12282-007-0015-y
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12282-007-0015-y

http://www.springerlink.com/content/p724x34746l56v73

http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10021288533

2010 – Antineoplastons – Japan – Tsuda – Phase II
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

Randomized Phase II Study of Hepatic Arterial Infusion with or without Antineoplastons as Adjuvant Therapy after Hepatectomy for liver Metastases from Colorectal Cancer
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/burzynski-the-antineoplaston-randomized-japan-phase-ii-clinical-trial-study
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
Antineoplaston Therapy Doubles 5-Year Survival Rate Following Curative Resection of Hepatic Mets

Randomized Phase II Study of Hepatic Arterial Infusion with or without Antineoplastons as Adjuvant Therapy after Hepatectomy for Liver Metastases from Colorectal Cancer
http://oncologypro.esmo.org/meeting-resources/meeting-abstracts/european-society-for-medical-oncology-esmo-2010/randomized-phase-ii-study-of-hepatic-ar-3558.aspx
Publication date: May 17, 2010
Category: Colorectal cancer
Publisher: ESMO
Y. Ogata; K. Shirouzu; K. Matono; M. Ushijima; S. Uchida; H. Tsuda
http://abstracts.webges.com/viewing/view.php?congress=esmo2010&congress_id=296&publication_id=3558
Abstract: 3558
Congress: ESMO 2010
Type: Publication
Topic: Colorectal cancer
Authors: Y. Ogata, K. Shirouzu, K. Matono, M. Ushijima, S. Uchida, H. Tsuda; Kurume/JP
http://www.biomeddefine.com/sdx/t31/all/100/epithelial+neoplasm+glandular+piperidines+chemical+ingredient.html

http://www.biomeddefine.com/sdx/t31/all/100/ca+secondary+cancer+piperidines+chemical+ingredient.html
Antineoplaston Therapy Doubles Five-Year Survival Rate Following Curative Resection of Hepatic Mets

Metastatic Colon Cancer:

In a Randomized Phase II Clinical Study, Antineoplaston Therapy Doubled the 5-Year Survival Rate Following Curative Resection of Hepatic Metastases
http://www.drugs.com/clinical_trials/metastatic-colon-cancer-randomized-phase-ii-clinical-study-antineoplaston-therapy-doubled-5-year-7307.html
HOUSTON–(BUSINESS WIRE)–May 27, 2009 – The Burzynski Research Institute, Inc.

(BRI) is pleased to announce the results of a randomized Phase II clinical study of antineoplaston therapy (ANP therapy) in metastatic colon cancer following curative resection of hepatic metastases

The study was performed at the Kurume University School of Medicine (Japan) in the Department of Surgery

A report of the study results is currently in press
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
study was performed in Japan
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. infusion of x
2. infusion of x plus IV ANP therapy
significant difference in overall survival between the 2 groups
5 year survival rate
63% in x plus ANP therapy arm
32% in the x only arm
Recurrence rate for the 2 groups
34%
69%
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Metastatic-Colon-Cancer-In-a-bw-15355368.html?.v=1

http://www.colorectal-cancer.ca/IMG/pdf/CCAC_Research_June_19_2009.pdf

http://www.colorectal-cancer.ca/IMG/pdf/CCAC_Research_June_19_2009.pdf
Annals of Oncology 2010;21:viii221

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

http://www.biomeddefine.com/sdx/t31/all/100/epithelial+neoplasm+glandular+piperidines+chemical+ingredient.html

http://www.biomeddefine.com/sdx/t31/all/100/ca+secondary+cancer+piperidines+chemical+ingredient.html

http://www.drugs.com/clinical_trials/metastatic-colon-cancer-randomized-phase-ii-clinical-study-antineoplaston-therapy-doubled-5-year-7307.html