Skip to primary content
Skip to secondary content

Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog

Stanislaw Rajmund Burzynski, Stanislaw R. Burzynski, Stanislaw Burzynski, Stan R. Burzynski, Stan Burzynski, S. R. BURZYNSKI, S. Burzynski, Arthur Burzynski, Hippocrates Hypocrite Hypocrites Critic Critics Critical HipoCritical

Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog

Main menu

  • Home
  • .
  • .
  • .
  • .
  • .
  • .
  • .
  • .
  • .
  • 1
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 1998 (1/15/1998)
  • 1999 (2/1999) Volume 74 Number 2 pg. 137 – 3 pgs.
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • About
  • List of Articles

Tag Archives: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/

Deconstructing Dr. David H. (Orac) Gorski – September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51

Posted on October 18, 2013 by didymusjudasthomas
Reply

20131018-001112.jpg
——————————————————————
DJT – Didymus Judas Thomas
——————————————————————
BB – Bob Blaskiewicz
======================================
(0:12:00)
——————————————————————
DJT – Well a lot of the time I’m making fun of y’all’s favorite oncologist, the way he words his blogs, and uhmmm I cite specifically from the FDA, from from the National Cancer Institute, from these other scientific sources, from scientific publications

I give people specific information so they can fact-check me, unlike a lot of The Skeptics who just go out there and say things and publish things on social media, they provide no back-up for their uhhh sayings
——————————————————————
(0:13:00)
——————————————————————
DJT – And so I’ve tried to add those things and allow people to search, on specific things like publications, or what I posted about The Lancet, or specifically about The Skeptics, or specifically about the oncologist
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
DJT – Well the thing is, when you accepted this hangout, I published my newest blog article and I specifically listed all the information I had critiqued from you previously including Amelia, and I posted the specific Twitter responses by BurzynskiMovie; which is probably Eric, to your issues with Amelia, and he disagrees with what the oncologist posted, and so I pretty much let his Twitter responses stand to what the oncologist said
——————————————————————
0:14:24
======================================

20130927-205944.jpg

If it's true that #burzynski and his adman Merola have insinuated that parents are to blame for Amelia's death that's utterly disgusting.

— FW (@frozenwarning) March 14, 2013

20130927-212352.jpg

@frozenwarning More inventions from the Orac/Gorski CULT – why not blame aliens or bigfoot for it? Oh! Unless you have all become psychic!

— Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) March 14, 2013

20130927-213845.jpg

20130927-222641.jpg

#oracknows #oracspsychicabilitiesarefailing #gorskineedstotrytheJREFPsychicChallenge! pic.twitter.com/AyHjRYZwEJ

— Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) March 14, 2013

20130927-214725.jpg

20130927-222605.jpg

#oracknows (?) #burzynski more libel conspiracy theories from a sociopath pic.twitter.com/Du1OrFENRS

— Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) March 14, 2013

Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) tweeted at 11:49pm – 14 Mar 13:
http://t.co/wxU2PHJ3GD

20130927-215629.jpg

20130927-222520.jpg

so-called *oncologist* never seen film & reviews it (orac/gorski) maybe he will add *review* 2 #burzynski wikipedia pic.twitter.com/wxU2PHJ3GD

— Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) March 15, 2013

======================================
DJT – Well what I find interesting about these other doctors is like like the doctors mentioned in the movie and BBC Panorama’s report and in some of these newspaper articles where they are mentioned again is that these doctors never do a review of Burzynski’s scientific publications and including our favorite oncologist who refuses to do so [4]

Uhhh
——————————————————————
0:24:10
——————————————————————
BB – “He’s read everything”

“I think”
======================================
11/2/2012 – “Personally having pored over Burzynski’s publications”
======================================

20131015-211323.jpg
======================================
5/8/2013 – “I’ve searched Burzynski’s publications”
======================================

20131015-213924.jpg
DJT – Oh yeah he says he’s read everything but uh you know he claims that he’s uhmmm reviewed, reviewed uh Burzynski’s personalized gene targeted therapy but he, but then just a few months ago he admitted, you know, I don’t know where Burzynski says which genes are targeted by antineoplastons

20131015-205255.jpg
And I pointed out which specific publications that Burzynski published, publications which specifically mention which genes are targeted by antineoplastons, and I said how can you claim that you’ve read and reviewed every Burzynski publication and you didn’t know which genes are targeted by antineoplastons when that’s specifically in the publications ?

To me that tells me that you do not know how antineoplastons work be because you just admitted you don’t know which genes Burzynski talks about

I mean that’s just funny as heck to me that he would say that [5]
——————————————————————
0:25:07
——————————————————————
DJT – But the other issue is that Skeptics have posted on there that he could not get that accelerated approval until he had published a phase 2 trial and that is exactly not the case because other drugs have been given accelerated approval before their results were published in phase 2 clinical trial publications, cuz, so that question remains as well [6]
======================================
“Temodar and Avastin both had proper, completed, and published phase II trials before approval”
======================================

20131017-230838.jpg

20131017-231725.jpg
======================================
Bob Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz) tweeted at 10:44am – 31 Jul 13:

@TomLemley1 @AceofSpadesHQ @mikespillane The FDA won’t approve his drug until he ever finishes and publishes a trial. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?te…

======================================

20130927-230121.jpg

@TomLemley1 @AceofSpadesHQ @mikespillane The FDA won't approve his drug until he ever finishes and publishes a trial. http://t.co/FyudQ6QGje

— Bob Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz) July 31, 2013

And so when I critique an oncologist or any other Skeptic I always provide source material so people can always fact-check me and I specifically said that people should fact-check everything ummm that the oncologist should say because he has, I’ve proven him to be frequently incorrect about his information and misleading
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
0:44:00
——————————————————————
DJT – The thing that’s funny is that people can say, ohhh Burzynski charges a lot, but the fact is, so does chemo, radiation, and some of these newspaper articles that have been published, and specifically in the movie, Burzynski 2, one of the people mentioned how much someone was paying for standard treatment

And I noticed our favorite oncologist didn’t comment about that in his movie review [7]
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
1:11:04
——————————————————————
BB – “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”
——————————————————————
DJT
That’s like, that’s like saying that Gorski’s web-site is disorganized, his blog is like anti vaccine one day, Burzynski the next, blah blah blah
——————————————————————
BB – “No, that is tied together”
——————————————————————
1:12:00
——————————————————————
BB – “But let me, we know that that the the, the central concern is Burzynski“
======================================
This is so Hilarious

Bob, why don’t you give a detailed explanation of how my blog with all its different search functions, is more “disorganized” than yours, and how about an in-depth data-analysis of Gorski’s “Respectful Insolence” blog, listing the # of Burzynski articles versus other articles

Oh

By the way, if you have NOT yet figured it out, my entire blog is Burzynski related
======================================
DJT – Well I think that people who really believe in “Free Speech,” and when it’s done rationally, I mean, Gorski would never, really respond to any of my questions, so I
——————————————————————
BB – “Did he, did he leave them up ?”

“Did he leave them up ?”
——————————————————————
DJT – Well I know that he specifically removed a review I did uh of his review of Burzynski I on his web, on his blog

But he’s pretty much left a lot of my comments up that I’ve seen

Uh, but he never really responded to my questions about, what he based his beliefs upon
——————————————————————
1:27:00
——————————————————————
BB – “Right, um, do you think that he is required to answer you ?”
——————————————————————
DJT – Well I would think, if you’re going to base your position on a certain thing, and then you can’t back it up with scientific literature, uh, you should answer, maybe not specifically to me, but answer the question

Answer to your readers [8]
——————————————————————
BB – “Right”
——————————————————————
DJT – You know, I can tell his readers come on my blog because it shows that they come on my blog
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
1:34:00
——————————————————————
BB – “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”
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
1:39:00
——————————————————————
BB – “Uh, what’s next for you”
——————————————————————
DJT – Well I’ll just keep reviewing the, any inaccurate statements I see posted

You know, it depends on if it’s Gorski, you know

Gorski’s gone on there and posted inaccurate stuff, and I call him out, you know he’s basically said on his blog, you know, if I do something inaccurate, you know, I’ll ‘fess up to it
======================================
======================================
6/3/2013 – “[I]f I had screwed up, I would have admitted it”
======================================

20131017-220228.jpg
Well, I’ve pointed out where he’s done that and said “Hey, you said you were gonna ‘fess up to it”

If I said on my blog that I was going to ‘fess up to doing something wrong, and you caught me, well, then I should, come out and say, “Okay, you got me”

But Gorski won’t even do that, you know, he just continues to go on down the road, as if
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
1:56:02
——————————————————————
DJT – Well, I’m sure, I’m sure Gorskiwould have a comment about that, as he’s commented previously about how he thinks uh Burzynski should publish
——————————————————————
BB – “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”
——————————————————————
1:57:10
——————————————————————
BB – “Um, yea, it doesn’t matter now whether or not Burz, whether or not Gorski agrees with how Burzynski publishes”
======================================
This is Laughable

Nowhere have I seen any indication from Gorski of a positive nature towards Burzynski [9]
======================================
DJT – Like I said before

Like I said before on my blog, you know, even if Burzynski publishes his phase 2 information, Gorski can just jump up and down and say, “Well, that just shows evidence of efficacy, you know, it’s not phase 3, so it doesn’t really prove it”
——————————————————————
1:58:04
——————————————————————
DJT – So then he can go on, you know, for however many years he wants to
——————————————————————
BB – “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”
——————————————————————
DJT – Well,
——————————————————————
BB – “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 ?”
——————————————————————
DJT – This is, this is a guy who must phone it in because, he went in there and posted the old Josephine Jones response that, you know, no drugs had been approved by the FDA without their final phase 2 publication 1st being published, which was not a factual statement, and you’ve made the same statement

So I, I’m thinking that Gorski just bought her statement and took it and ran with it, and before he fact-checked it, and what, what happened, it was wrong
——————————————————————
1:59:00
——————————————————————
DJT – I mean, Gorski needs to stop phoning stuff in, and check his sources before he posts stuff, because I’ve found many cases where, he hasn’t seemed to do that, and that’s why I question him
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
DJT – He’s done more than the case studies

He’s specifically given uh, almost all the information om an oncologist would want

And Gorski, and Gorski
——————————————————————
BB – “Except for a ph, completed phase 3 clinical trial”
——————————————————————
(laughing)

DJT – I mean, I love Gorski, but he comes up with these stupid excuses like, “Well, Burzynski is not an oncologist”
——————————————————————
2:01:00
——————————————————————
DJT – Well, Gorski doesn’t go go in there and look at his other, his phase 2 clinical trial publications, as far as the preliminary reports, and look at the co-authors, and see if any of those guys are oncologists, and that they’re working with Gorski, I mean they’re working with Burzynski

I find that ridiculous
——————————————————————
Uh, Guy Chapman, “It’s a blog, not a peer-reviewed publication”
——————————————————————
BB – “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”
======================================
PROVE IT [10]
======================================
2:03:03
——————————————————————
DJT – I mean, Gorski doesn’t want to deal with the issues

Hey, I’ve said it to Gorski

He liked to back his stuff up on the Mayo study, yet he wouldn’t, he wouldn’t uh debate about the Mayo study

He likes to say, “Well, Burzynski is not an oncologist,” but he won’t, say Hey, look at the publications, are any of the guys on the publications oncologists ?

We know that Gorski, we know that Burzynski works with oncologists in his practice

So, just because Burzynski himself is not an an oncologist, does not necessarily mean anything

Do we need to go out, onto PubMed, and, and review every particular person that’s published something about cancer and see if they’re all oncologists ?

Seriously
——————————————————————
2:04:11
——————————————————————
DJT – I mean, Gorski will just
——————————————————————
BB – “Yeah, but they”
——————————————————————
DJT – post a lot of stuff without backing it up
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
2:16:09
——————————————————————
DJT – What I defend, is that, y’all post stuff, a lot of Skeptics post stuff, including Gorski, and they do not back it up, with references, citations, or links

Gorski will just post stuff, like he did about saying, you know, the FDA would not approve, uh, accelerated approval, without a final phase 2 clinical trial being published, which was an incorrect statement, he did not provide any link
——————————————————————
BB – “Even if it’s true or false you, honestly though”
——————————————————————
DJT – We know it’s false
——————————————————————
BB – “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”
——————————————————————

——————————————————————
2:18:00
——————————————————————
DJT – You know, I don’t see why Gorski is afraid of debating issues
——————————————————————
BB – “I don’t think he is””
——————————————————————
DJT – on the Internet, on his blog
——————————————————————
BB – “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”
——————————————————————
2:19:00
——————————————————————
BB – “I mean”
——————————————————————
DJT – Hey, he has time to post about, “Hey, uh, Burzynski got a Catholic award from somebody,” which, has nothing to do with antineoplastons, whatsoever

So, you know, he’s not focusing just in on,

“Do antineoplastons work, yes or no?,”

“When will Burzynski publish ?,” yes or no ?

You know, he’s putting all this ridiculous side junk, you know

So, I am not going to take that seriously
======================================
REFERENCES:
======================================
[1] – September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/04/september-28-2013-the-skeptics-burzynski-discussion-by-bob-blaskiewicz-21951/
======================================
[2] – 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
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/burzynski-timeline-2-3/
======================================
[3] – DJT’s Comments – September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/burzynski-timeline-2/
======================================
[4] – Critiquing David H. Gorski, MD, PhD, FACS http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/david-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/21/critiquing-david-h-gorski-md-phd-facs-www-sciencebasedmedicine-orgeditorial-staffdavid-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/
======================================
[5] – Critiquing: Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski, M.D., Ph.D, L.I.A.R.:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/critiquing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-l-i-a-r/
======================================
[6] – Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, quickly realized that David H. Gorski, MD, PhD, FACS is NOT doing something wrong when he LIES about Burzynski:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/27/wayne-state-university-detroit-michigan-quickly-realized-that-david-h-gorski-md-phd-facs-is-not-doing-something-wrong-when-he-lies-about-burzynski/
======================================
[7] – Critiquing: In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski “cancer cure”
is reviewed…with Insolence:

——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/critiquing-in-which-the-latest-movie-about-stanislaw-burzynski-cancer-cure-is-reviewed-with-insolence-2/
======================================
[8] – IMPORTANT: The live “debate” that wasn’t-A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/important-the-live-debate-that-wasnt-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics/
======================================
[9] – Does David H. “Orac” Gorski, M.D., Ph.D, really CARE about Breast Cancer patients?:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/does-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-really-care-about-breast-cancer-patients/
======================================
[10] – Burzynski: “The Skeptics™” – Harming without Care:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/burzynski-the-skeptics-harming-without-care/
======================================

Advertisement
Posted in Bob Blaskiewicz (Robert J. Blaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz), Debate ?, Gorski ScienceBlogs.com/Insolence ScienceBasedMedicine, Guy Chapman, Stanislaw Rajmund Burzynski, The Skeptics | Tagged "Alexander J. Walt Comprehensive Breast Center", "all of those therapies, "American College of Surgeons Committee on Cancer", "Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center / Institute", "Bay Clinical uh Research and Clinical Development", "Big Boy pants", "Bob Blaskiewicz Faux Skeptic Exposed!", "bring it on”, "Burzynski has a contingent of defenders who have targeted skeptics like me for special abuse, "Burzynski never explains which genes are targeted by antineoplastons", "Cardiff, "check me out", "Critiquing Dr David H. "Orac" Gorski, "Dan Buzzard", "David James", "Dianthus Medical", "Didnt take long for the Burzynski trolls to show up", "Dr. Gorski", "Eau Claire", "evidence of efficacy", "hide like a snake in the grass", "I'm calling you out", "if I had screwed up, "If it's true that #burzynski and his adman Merola have insinuated that parents are to blame for Amelia's death that's utterly disgusting", "In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski’s “cancer cure” is reviewed…with Insolence", "Institute for Science in Medicine", "My university quickly realized that I was not", "National Geographic", "National Health Service (NHS)", "Of course it's always possible that the money launderers are appearing as themselves in the #Burzynski advertisement", "Oh, "on my my show um had said things that were demonstratively untrue", "Own it, "Peter Bowditch", "phase 3 trials", "Rhys Morgan" Wales, "Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz", "Science Based Medicine . org Editorial Staff", "ScienceBasedMedicine . org", "ScienceBlogs . com", "screwed up", "Section of Breast Surgery / Graduate Program in Cancer Biology", "Sheila Herron", "Skeptic Canary Show", "Stanislaw Burzynski versus the BBC", "Stanislaw Burzynski: A deceptive propaganda movie versus an upcoming news report", "The Council for Biotechnology Information", "the Merritts", "The new Doctor Who will be Stanislaw #Burzynski. He manages to continually avoid getting cornered and he gets away with murder", "The Poxes Blog", "The Skeptic Canary", "University of Michigan", "University of Wisconsin", "Unlike Mr. Merola, "Wayne State University School of Medicine", "Wayne State University", "Yes, "You are right now having a live debate in front of more than 10, #sciencebasedmedicine, #SkepticCanary, $30, . . 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, 000 dollars and then she died Uhmmm, 000 dollars to start on a life-saving treatment for a child would be a steal, 000 people, 000 some odd dollars We same thing in the, 6, @Ac2cSheila, @bbc5live, @BorisOgon, @BurzynskiSaves I don't care what you think. My only concern is for the cancer patients. People like #burzynski make me sick", @DanBuzzard, @DianthusMed, @drpaulmorgan, @endless_psych, @FauxSkeptic, @frozenwarning, @gorskon, @IamBreastCancer, @medTek, @oracknows, @palMD, @RatbagsDotCom, @rjblaskiewicz, @SceptiGuy, @ScienceBasedMed, @StortSkeptic, @vGuyUK, @_JosephineJones, a # of us, a a good, a a is not progression of disease but is is inducement to to stay on, a ah a link to, a comment I guess uh that there are a lot of people who wanna talk to you (laughter) Uh, a fight over whether or not the parents should be allowed to continue treating this kid He was basically lying, a patient reporting that um uh getting worse is getting better How do you explain that ? Well that’s just a known side-effect, a possibility of what, a real effect, a respected peer-reviewed journal, a tiny fraction of that back from the insurance companies, a white paper called “Why do so many pase 3 clinical trials fail ? 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, academic, according to to Guy iye he knows no other one Um, accountability, Adam Jacobs, additionally he charges immense amounts of money for this drug, admission, ah, ah have you read The Other Burzynski Patient Group ? So, Ahm, ahmmm what is your response say to the story of Amelia Saunders ? Okay, all the while, alright Now, alright Okay, alright then, also, also Uh, and, and also the bare minimum that that the larger medical community will accept uhhh as evidence, and and and, and and and that’s the thing we don’t, and and and what part of that’s not true Okay, and and uh Popehat, and and wont react well to pressure, and David points this out, and deserves to be out there That’s a long time when someone is dying Well, and failed, and have gotten nothin’ but grief from a lot of people, and he also said that the drug was FDA approved, and he hasn’t sent it along to mass approval, and he wanted to get a statement from the University The University of course ignored him, and he would earn every nickel of it Um, and his family", and his intellectual property So the FDA is protecting him, and his patients don’t leave his office, and I do wait to go back to the, and I will respond to it once I’ve taken a look at that, and I’ll go back to the, and I’ll I’ll draw an uh, and I’ll respond on your web-site Um, and if Burzynski were to demonstrate his efficacy, and immediately let me know that I was going to get smeared Um, and including, and it was ascribed to the tumor they might well not do it, and none has been published in its entirety for over 15 years When you consider that this is a, and nothing you have presented suggests that you would be more coherent in person", and often when we are talking about these cancers, and one of the questions that we had, and pits people who are doing standard cancer research, and radiation does seem to extend life, and separate those, and that kept her on uh treatment for a a another month so that could be another $7, and that was a Have you read Chase’s story It would stick with you, and that’s exactly what would show to us whether or not his rate is better, and that’s gone nowhere In fact, and that’s why the costs are so inflated Um, and then I’d be all for it I would say that right now, and then there are people who are really helping the disease I mean, and these people have extra things in their brains that probably won’t react well to swelling, and this, and this has been going on for decades Eh, and this is, 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, and to have no sense of how other people’s diseases progressed, and uh Eric Merola said that I had been um, and um uh a Gorski has had his accreditation board contacted, and Well, and why you can’t take that as necessarily being evidence of efficacy Ah, another thing is that uh the kind of cult that’s sprung up around Burzynski, approves uh phase 3 trials, are actually uh grateful, are approved, 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, are you following the Hashtag, as a lump but extend life by uh quality of life for 3 months or something um in some cases but, as best as I can tell from an outsider, as enemies, as far as I can tell A every time that I and and and and, as far as I understand it The Lancet, 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, as this is going on Okay I’m doing, as you just pointed out, as you keep putting it, at least the sodium load that that that patients are asked to to carry, at some point, “I do know cancer science”, “I’ve searched Burzynski’s publications", “Look, “Okay, “Our only goal is to promote high standards of science in medicine”, “Personally, “Um, “which genes are targeted by antineoplastons“, “you know”, based on bad phase 2 trials Would that be, based on flawed phase 2, based on flawed phase 2 clinical trials That is therefor a real possibility in this case Yes you would But, basically, because in order to, because that case is grotesque The parents, because that means there allowed to go ahead and submit their material to another journal more quickly and get it out there Uhm, because we’re on a Google+ stream that that’s a lot of data it takes awhile to bring up my, been spreading mis truths about Burzynski", Blatherskitewicz, blog, Bob Blaskiewicz, Boris Ogon, 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, Britain, but, but can #Burzynski time travel?", but I definitely recommend that you look at Jaffe’s book and you will see, but if there were other cases where this type of complication arose, 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 , but she wasn’t there for for very long but uh her condition deteriorated very rapidly Uhmmm, but that doesn’t mean that it didn’t have an effect on her And you can clearly tell, but the idea, but the reaction that we saw on the side of the Burzynski camp was that, but then it reaches a point where it’s a self-limited growth, but uhmmm, but we actually have people say Are there, but when it’s, but whether or not it it it had a genuine therapeutic effect is a different matter all together Um, but yeah, 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 alwa, can get, case, Chapman has just updated me and he says um that it is, Claim, claimed, constantly, Conundrum, correct Oh, 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, David Gorski, David H. Gorski, Debate, definitely look at that Um, Detroit, did not understand the significance of this cyst that had opened up in, do an autopsy Um, do with the drug This this But, do you concede, do you concede that ? Well, do you have any sense of when these trials are going to be published ? From Laura ? Right When you, do you think that there is a uh uh conspiracy to keep Burzynski from publishing ? Right Right So, does, Dr. David H. Gorski, eg, eh, eh just based on what we’ve been able to find that patients have been reporting this for decades At some point, elevate uh the profile of his drug, especially Gorski, especially the brainstem gliomas That these cancers uh the cases resolved fairly quickly, ethical, even if in the aggregate their rates aren’t better It might work on some individuals tumors rather than on, even in principle, even people who, even people who support me have given me grief for this Um, even though the components cost pennies Um, exclusive rights to produce and sell this stuff, FACS a/k/a Orac", for a couple of years at least, for all the the phase 1 and phase 2 trials, for decades This doesn’t have anything to do with the, for me, for me to come around and promote Burzynski Um, for one of the most intractable diseases, forever Um, from any effect of antineoplaston, FW, go ahead Yeah, going back to Amelia, Gorski, Guy Chapman, 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, Guy Chapman has just um uh tossed in a a, guychapman, had a, had the same reading given to them Um, have demonstrated efficacy", 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 appro, have you noticed the the, having pored over Burzynski’s publications", 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 could do that if if the other, he does all that vertically, he has an approved phase 3, he he’s done well to listen to Jaffe’s advice, he needs to get a publication in a uh, he said that he was gonna do, he should open up his uh research uh protocols um and just say, he’s never done that But if you think about that, he’s still on the, hello, her name escapes me at the moment Um, her name is, hey when when we talk about The Other Burzynski Patient Group, hi everyone Uhmmm, how can we possibly say without a single published trial he, 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, http//www.sciencebasedmedicine.org, http://anp4all.com, http://blog.rbutr.com/, http://cancerbiologyprogram.med.wayne.edu/faculty/gorski.php, http://josephinejones.wordpress.com/, http://lanyrd.com/2013/tam/sckkdy/, http://medicine.cf.ac.uk/person/prof-paul-morgan/, http://necss.org/speakers/bob-blaskiewicz/, http://prognosis.med.wayne.edu/article/dr-gorski-named-codirector-of-michigan-breast-oncology-quality-initiative, http://rbutr.com/, http://rhysmorgan.co/blog, http://sciencebasedmedicine.org, http://scienceblogs.com/Insolence, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/02/stanislaw-burzynski-fails-to-save-another-patient/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/08/eric-merola-and-stanislaw-burzynskis-secret-weapon-against-the-skeptics-fabio-lanzoni-part-2/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/03/in-which-the-latest-movie-about-stanislaw-burzynskis-cancer-cure-is-reviewed-with-insolence/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/04/stanislaw-burzynski-versus-the-bbc/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/07/i-want-my-anp/, http://t.co/EHgW0hnLAc, http://t.co/vh3cgAR6hW, http://the21stfloor.tumblr.com, http://thehoustoncancerquack.com/, http://thewelshboyo.wordpress.com, http://twentyfirstfloormirror.wordpress.com, http://virtualskeptics.com/, http://www.blogtalkradio.com/skepticcanary/, http://www.centerforinquiry.net/speakers/blaskiewicz_bob, http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/blahg, http://www.csicop.org/author/rblaskiewicz, http://www.dianthus.co.uk/blog/, http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterlipson/, http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterlipson/2013/04/19/a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics, http://www.karmanos.org/Physicians/Details.aspx?sid=1&physician=70, http://www.med.wayne.edu/surgery/faculty/DGorski.html, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/david-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/peter-a-lipson-md/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/stanislaw-burzynski-propaganda-versus-news, http://www.scienceblogs.com/Insolence, http://www.skeptical.gb.net/, http://www.skepticalhumanities.com, http://www.thetwentyfirstfloor.com, http://www.thetwentyfirstfloor.com/?p=8146/, http://www.uwec.edu/Staff/blaskir/, http://www.wsusurgery.com/facultyc3/david-gorski/, http://www.wsusurgery.com/research-team-dr-gorski/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/critiquing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-l-i-a-r/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/university-of-michigan-where-is-alum-dr-david-h-orac-gorskis-grapefruits/ ====================================== � � � � � � � , https://thepoxesblog.wordpress.com, https://twitter.com/Ac2cSheila/status/186164592676843520, https://twitter.com/DanBuzzard/status/18611025740208537, https://twitter.com/frozenwarning/status/312141313451634688, https://twitter.com/gorskon/status/363147810620702721, https://twitter.com/palmd/status/325612864549310466, https://twitter.com/RatbagsDotCom/status/304050113834262528, https://twitter.com/StortSkeptic/status/363088970239840256, hurrah No, I, I am indeed very concerned with getting my facts correct”, I am still scrolling through looking for this story that I wanted to talk about Uh, I can’t say that, I consulted my lawyer and uh uh, I didn’t, I didn’t realize that he was also, I don’t exactly know if he was on the treatment the whole time 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, I don’t know what the state of that is right now Um, 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 , I don’t read your blog Uh um, 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, I don’t see anything Well it’s an invisible dragon Well okay, I don’t think he’s shown uh that he can carry off a uh a research program responsibly Uhmmm Well Oh he, I guess I’ll It should be in Amelia’s I I, I had my uh a couple weeks before Christmas my, I have to, I have to look into it That’s just, I I don’t think he’d be able to get one, I I think as far as I went was that she went, I just find that to be contradictory and and self-defeating Um, I mean that if it does have a a an improvement rate above uh other treatments That still has an improvement rate, I mean they’re there uhm uhhh but, I mean uh, I mean you have a right to do that but but I I’ve found that posting under a pseudonym diminishes my credibility —————————————————————— That’s a Red Her, I packed Amelia’s story with all the stories, I think, I think it is, I want to give them a a chance to address you as well Uhmmm, I want to point something else out to you Um, I want to turn this over to the people who are watching Um, I would, I would have admitted it", I'm calling out the institutions with which you have a professional relationship", I’ll look at that, I’ll look into that I hope somebody is writing all this down out there, I’m doing the 2 things at once and it’s um, I’m not assuming that —————————————————————— There is a correct here Exactly That’s the right answer You don’t know You don’t know You need to look , I’m not saying there were, I’ve seen any number of people looking at um, ideology and and the uh panaceas are are are to be and a variety of different types of causes um, if he could get a grant to study this stuff But, if his drug genuinely works, if if you think about it though, if in fact you don’t have to reach the full dosage in order to have uh severe side effects Ummm, if it works, if you look at the, 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, if you were to learn, in, in a in a coma uh without possibility of reversal, in a uh uh brain dead uh for all intents and purposes, in and of itself That’s another comment Um, in Cody G’s story And then lastly and and the worst uh thing that we’ve seen, in fact in any one tumor you would, in fact just disoriented, in fact they were ecstatic They were delighted Um, in his parents living room for months Um, in millions of homes, in order to make sure that everybody who needs it can get, in particular a, in the case of, incorrectly, individual patient, institutions, is is, is is talking about the costs there Uhmmm, is that I am taking exactly no money from anyone for this, is that if Burzynski is the savior that he claims to be, is that you would be honest about this, is the hospital only expects to get a fraction, is to complete a phase 3 uh trial uh he started uh I believe was it just the one, is to keep it in house That seems, 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, isn’t necessarily having anything to do with the efficacy of the drug That comes across very clearly Um, it, it depends on the type Some drugs it’s ethical to give something completely questionable, it it it doesn’t seem to me that necessarily an autopsy would be um a a done deal Um, it it still has an effect, it seems rather unrealistic Um, it was withdrawn this I think within the last week It doesn’t look like its going to happen, it’s actually a tumor that’s growing That record there, it’s ah as you could imagine it could be very difficult for the families to do that especially when they have ooh ah, 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, it’s incorporeal Well, it’s indistinguishable from something that’s not there And that kind of out, it’s it’s it’s not the FDA’s, it’s it’s the Doubting Thomas Um, it’s my responsibility as a reader”, it’s No, it’s prepared by Anastassios Retzios, Jesus says, Josephine Jones, just looked like someone had taken the piss out of her I mean, just so that you know, Keir Liddle, knowing these facts, L.I.A.R.", led to the ultimate demise, let me go back to the Twitter feed Um Well it sounds to me like they’re they’re not um, let me see No we don’t and it would be irresponsible to completely speculate on on, let me see Someone has just sent me a, let me see Well, let’s, let’s back up What would the FDA, let’s measure for the heat of the breath Well it’s heatless flame that it breathes And, let’s say, let’s uh spray paint it Well, let’s wait for for that to roll in, lets talk about these patients who report symptoms of getting worse, liars, lie, lied, lilady, London, M.D.", man I couldn’t imagine really going through this myself, Michigan, my, my site Let me Uhmmm Well, NatGeo, 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, not a uh, not like the the Journal of Medical Hypothesis or things we just made up Um, now I never went on you know on to say ummm that uh she had uh reached therapeutic levels Uhmmm, o-kay Uh, of Haley, of of cancers, of people believing, often approves, oh my gosh, oh no it’s ah it’s floating Well, oh this is one of the very 1st ones that we did on the, ok, ok It doesn’t matter where It doesn’t matter where it comes from uh, ok let me tell you exactly what it will take, ok Let’s let’s back, ok ok well it’s well ok I can’t I can’t go in and read that right now Um, okay ? Um, okay There, on, on the site Uhmmm, on top of that, one has been finished, 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 w, one of the things that that there there are 2 points to be made here Uhm, one question I’d wondered, one that is immune to uh criticism, onforb.es/11pwse9, only by proxy, open up his trials, 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, or that the growing has slowed after they’ve started Well, Orac, our favorite oncologist (laugh), over 60 opportunities to prove himself worth uh their confidence and hasn’t Um, Paul Morgan, people have been critical of of of Burzynski have faced retaliation for opposing him ah and intimidation, permission to investigate is not evidence of anything other than evidence of a valid protocol, Peter A. Lipson, Ph.D, Ph.D Is Anastassios Retzios reliable ? Um What, Professor", progress, prove something false, Put up or shut up, Quidama, r-but-r, rbutr, reaching therapeutic levels and having a biological effect on someone are are clearly different things in her case Uhmmm, Reason, reduce the size of some tumors some times Um, relat, replacement therapy Uh and there isn’t a doctor on the planet, reporting this excitedly, respectable journal that oncologists would read, right ? Okay Alright That that, right ? So, right ? They’re not sharing his trial designs because they are his trial designs, right ? Uhmmm, right ?", right? That the makeup of his drug that he’s distributing are his, S.", Samantha T in 2005 We see it again as far back as 1994, SBM, see, 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, seems only fair Um, she paid her $30, she uh the the difference in her conscious state was no noticeable for anyone to see Ummm, SkepticScared", so, so it, 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, so it’s the question, so that we can go back and look at these claims later, so that’s, 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, so this is, so this is the Doubting Thomas This is the Doubting Thomas Okay, so this is the one, 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 poste, so we were wondering, 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, some of the things that have happened, someone has just sent a a note, something, something that we see over and over are patients reporting over and over that signs of getting worse are signs if getting better Um, sorry, surgeon, t, taken as far as I can tell as evidence of a conspiracy or that his name is is poison uh I mean, talk about me in his new movie, that, that 45% of phase 3 clinical trials fail due to deficient phase 2 design Um, that allows uh, that didn’t involve them ultimately somehow being responsible for it, 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, that had opened up in the center of the tumor, that he can market to the entire world His business model as best I can tell, that he has an improved rate over Temodar or anything like that, that he should, that I could find um in what we’d written up already Um Hold on a sec She is a cute kid though Um, that I had been a be, that if there was the slightest hint that antineoplaston deficiency was a cause of cancer that it would make it into the literature, that in order to have a phase 3, that is there, that it depends on people paying money up front It doesn’t depend on him developing and taking away a viable drug, that it doesn’t work O-kay Um, that look really good on paper, that most people are, that oh well the tumor can keep on growing Th (laugh) that that that’s an invisible dragon, that one, that research oncologists would read I would need an completely independent group to replicate his findings, that seems to give him an instant out, that she was lethargic and a little bit out of it, that sometimes phase 3 trials, that suggests to me that there’s something else going on here Now, that that that it seems that there was a lot of political pressure applied to the FDA which may have been, that that the FDA is is somehow antagonistic toward him They’ve given him every opportunity, that that was the same guy So, that that’s what the tumor looks like People are reporting that the tumor is no longer growing, that the FDA, that the format of your blog does not make sense to us, that this particular pattern is, that um, 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, that we’d love to see, that when we have criticized this, that would be amazing, that would give another option to people, that would have a therapeutic effect on and that the risks outweigh the possible benefits of using this one particular drug Um, that you’re dealing with a quack Um, 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, that’s being left by patients, that’s Luna Pettiguine’s mother, 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, that’s not right But um, that’s what has Orphan Drug status Alright, 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, the, the 1st inclination is to ascribe the death to, 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, the ADR research . com issues in clinical research, the and let’s be very specific about this, the AS10 stuff or A1 or whatever it’s called ? Okay, the best, the best course of action was figured out, the business model that the Burzynski Clinic seems to depend on, the Chancellor of my University was contacted via e-mail, the comment, 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 anyt, the design trial, the family, the new web-site by the Burzynski patients fighting back group, the other thing he could do, the outcome of that uh, the patients report that Burzynski himself told Chase uh Sammut The exact same thing Um, the phase 3 is is will be the gold standard, the positive outcomes, the proposed action as I understand it of the antineoplaston is that it’s a deacetylase inhibitor, the random weird rare but very real survive, the same diagnosis uh same prognosis was to, The Skeptics, the source of this ah of of those #’s that I just gave you, the the, the the base cost that that’s calculated is, the the family of Haley S., the the lawyer", the the the you know, the the things that you see on The Other Burzynski Patent Group, the the types of publications that he’s done, the the yeah I’ve never seen anyone say that the purpose of the antineoplastons is to cause uhhh, the thing on his web-site where if you make a donation to the clinic it goes directly to him ? Right You know, the thing that gets me over and over and over, the time between uh doublings in size decreases logarithmically Um, the tumor grows exponentially while the resources are available to it, the way that we got to this point, the ways in which, then be afraid Ummm, there, there are lots of people have lots of questions about me out there Uh, there are only a few cases of people recovering from that, there have been, there is an explanation for that, there there’s a lot to that Um, there was even a uh, 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, therefor it works ? So what you’re saying is there’s nothing that would convince you now, these are all huge red flags, these people, these tumors are are completely uh heterogenous The idea that there’s gonna be one knockout, they do do this with other drugs, they say support the cure not the cancer Um, they’ll never publish us Uhm, they’re um uhhh, they’ve put the clinical hold on now because they now have evidence that somebody may have died because of the treatment Um, this, this is a a cancer, this is an important point too Um, 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, this is important This is really important though Wha, this is like basic tumor physiology that we’re talking about, this is not a minor thing for for for Skeptics This, this is your chance t, this treatment is working or this is not evidence that the treatment is working That’s pretty basic I mean we’re not, those are all backed uh by, those are very preliminary trials Uhmmm, 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, throws up the the, to, to restrict the blood flow to the tumor and and and uh cause it to die that way, to that publication I can give you a minute to to go find it if that’s That would be good Uhmmm Well, to the to the, to the tumor, to yourself, Tweet, tweeted, uh, uh Antineoplastons has a better rate ? Right Right, uh but the way that you’d earlier phrased your uh your response to “could you possibly be proved wrong ?”, uh design, uh from outside scrutiny While you may imagine that that, uh Galileo’s You know what it’s called, 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, uh journal, uh myself, uh no other institution has a 3 for 3 fail, uh not a medical specialist on the planet, uh one of the issues that Skeptics have with Burzynski is that in order to, 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 necr, uh Rhys Morgan, uh that he has failed 3 different Institutional Review Board audits; this is Guy Chapman, uh that man eh can can can, uh uh uh publication in a peer-reviewed journal, uh Wayne Merritt, uhhh, uhhh the the question of The Lancet publication ehhh is par for the course, uhm uh, uhmmm, 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 t, um . me see I’m just looking at other things that are coming in on the Hashtag right now Um, um at least as good as anything the Burzynski Patient Group has ever done Uhmmm, um Do you have any questions for me ? I’ve spent a lot of times asking questions of you Mhmm Guy Chapman, um So-kay, um that um it’s called um, um that would be shooting the messenger as opposed to dealing with the question, um those are all cited, um where we know that cancer has a a varied uh, ummm, 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, unexpected survivals that occur, United Kingdom, up to and including harassing me at work by calling my university to complain about my online verbiage critical of Burzynski and implying that I am somehow doing something wrong", usually, Wales, was able to correctly determine that the Saunders family, was given to Justin B in 2006 A similar cyst in Lesley S’s story uh ah, was in 2006 Um, we do have this pattern, we don’t know why he’s getting a phase 3 And there’s a real story in that, 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 w, we get extremely concerned about what’s happening Uhmmm, we just pointed out, we know what the outcome are fairly quickly Ummm, we often don’t realize that we’re not being honest with ourself I try to fight against it, we raised, we think Um, we would love to see him do this, we’re not talking about deactsylace inhibitors or anything like that were you’d really need to know something about This is, well, well at least the videos before the family took it down, well I don’t actually, well in that case the best response is “I don’t know” 1. Ah, well then, well then we’ll put flour down on the ground to see that it’s it it’s standing there And, what did I get wrong ? Uh was that Amelia and Luna ? Luna was the other one, what happens if the FDA occasionally op op opposes, what have we missed ? Well okay, what is the Didymus Judas Thomas reference to Oh, what it’s supposed to mean Alright, what part of, what part of that is not absolutely terrifying to you Well, what stuff would you like What stuff would you like me to do ? I generally, what they want to make sure that they at least get the standard care, what we would say, 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, what would prove you wrong, what’s the word I’m looking for, when a patient is self-pay there is a self-pay price which is a more reasonable price Additionally, when I asked you, when it comes to ummm the rates of antineoplastons, when she’s talking about, when someone is not insured in in this country, when they get a speedy rejection from a uh uh, when you can’t falsify something When you cannot, when you only look at the at the, when you think about a major, when you whittle away, where he gets, where is alum Dr. David H. Orac Gorski’s Grapefruits ?", where the sole distributor of the therapy from his pharmacy 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 th, whether or not, which actually, which is, 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, which is certainly one therapeutic approach that’s been, which is exactly in Burzynski’s favor to only look at the positive outcomes, which is like which we just pointed out was a was an invisible dragon Ultimately it would, which it, which slightly unspools DNA, 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, who, who else was on there, who had died, 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, whose stories are every bit as important as the as the stories of the patients who have lived, why hasn’t Burzynski done anything to change that ? Right Well, 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 th, why why why not, why would you prefer that to to another drug if it did essentially the same thing, Wisconsin, with or without Burzynski Uhhh ummm, with with the Amelia story, would, would be apply to Federal grant That, would be to Burzynski’s benefit if there were other cases, would that cause any doubt in your mind ? About the efficacy of ANP Yeah, would that make you reconsider your position of the phase 3 being evidence that it works Uh um could you send me that link, wousa, www.whybiotech.com, yeah, yeah that’s a, yeah Um, you, you could say that these, you do not need to have a successful phase 2 ? When 45% of phase 3 fail because they have a deficient phase 2 design, you get a diagnosis of uh brainstem glioma the prognosis is very bad Uhmmm, you have these kids who are uh you know 2 and 3 and have had this, 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, you know in the videos, you know maybe you haven’t reached a therapeutic dose level, you know that it’s an, you know the critique that, you know they they sign off on it but that is is, 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, you know uh sodium load will increase your blood pressure, you know Ummm, you know Well, you know where she had been up and about to in her bed kind of slurring and and, you know which includes radiation Um, you little bitch", you mentioned it yourself, you put your your, you said that the FDA hasn’t approved a phase 3 Well, 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 show me the, you understand that these doctors, you understand why they do that, you will see, 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 t, you you don’t need to reach full dosage ’cause the the full dosage for these ANP seem to be pretty high, you you it it is it taken as a, 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, you’re back Yeah Google+ is a little wonky sometimes But, 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, 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, you’re talking, your going to know that going in, your hand inside the wound You know, yourself | Leave a reply

The Skeptics™” Robert J. (don’t call me “Bobby”) Blaskiewicz wants to Debate

Posted on September 27, 2013 by didymusjudasthomas
Reply

20130927-162310.jpg

20130927-171650.jpg
Bob thinks we can debate all this in an hour 🙂
======================================
3/4/2013 – 7:58pm – You posted on Colorado Public Television (CPT12):

“ANP is toxic as anything!”

So you’re saying what ?

ANP is as toxic as water ?

[1]
——————————————————————
“It gives people insanely high sodium, and Burzynski is currently not allowed to be dispensed by Burzynski because, according to a patient, it killed someone”

FAIL – provides no citation(s), reference(s), or link(s) to support “toxic” and “tons of chemo” statements

[1]
——————————————————————
“This is not harmless stuff”

“This is not non-toxic”

FAIL – provides no citation(s), reference(s), or link(s) to support “toxic” and “tons of chemo” statements

[1]
——————————————————————
“And most of Burzynski’s patients never qualify for his trials”

“That’s the lure”

“They all end up taking tons of chemo used off label”

FAIL – provides no citation(s), reference(s), or link(s) to support “toxic” and “tons of chemo” statements

“Tons of chemo” ?

Even your “man-crush” cancer oncologist has blogged that it’s “low-dose” chemo

20130928-012958.jpg
======================================
12/13/2012 – Stanislaw Burzynski: “Personalized gene-targeted cancer therapy” for dummies
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/12/13/stanislaw-burzynski-personalized-gene-targeted-cancer-therapy-for-dummies/
======================================
[1]
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 at 12:25pm – You posted on CPT12:

“How awful does your feedback need to be before you realize that you are going to endanger your viewership?”

The feedback was:

241 – Yes
97 – No
2 – Undecided

What was your point ?

[2]
——————————————————————
3/12/2013 – Why did “The Skeptics™” on CPT12 resort to adolescent name-calling:

“trolls,” “spammers,” “disingenuous,” “dishonest,” “profoundly dishonest,” “sheer stubborn stupid,” “stupid,” “spambot,” “fools,” “shills, “conman” ?

Don’t they have the intelligence a “Professor of Writing” should have ?

[3]
——————————————————————
3/12/2013 – Why did “The Skeptics™” on CPT12 and elsewhere whine about publication when the Declaration of Helsinki

30. addresses publishing human clinical trial data

does NOT indicate WHEN the data should be published, leaving it open to interpretation as to if it should be done piecemeal, or when all trials re a specific drug or drugs are completed after Phase I, II, or III, for example ?

[3]
——————————————————————
Why did “The Skeptics™” on CPT12 and elsewhere rant about scientific peer-reviewed journals and their “Impact Factors” but did NOT know what to do about this ?:

National Cancer Institute
at the National Institutes of Health

Cancer Clinical Trials

15. “The results of clinical trials are OFTEN published in peer-reviewed scientific journals”

” … whether or NOT the results are published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal … “
http://m.cancer.gov/topics/factsheets/clinical-trials

[4]
——————————————————————
Blaskiewicz, do you have this many honors / awards ?

20 – HONORS AND AWARDS

LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD. March 2012. Dallas /Ft. Worth, TX

The Order of Merit of the President of Poland – Officer’s Cross, October, 2004

Decoration of Polish Medical Association, November, 2001

The Order of Saint Brigida – Grand Cross with Star, November, 2001

The Order of Saint Stanislas – Grand Cross with Star, November, 2000

The Order of Reconciliation – Noember, 2000

The Cross Virtus Nobilitat, June, 1999

The Wisdom Award of Honor, December, 1998

The Medal of the President of City of Lublin, Poland, December, 1998

The Order of Saint Stanislas- Commander’s Cross with Star, December, 1997

The Lady Liberty Award “for engaging in invigorating the Right to be Secure in their Effects by fourteen years of perseverance in practicing his Profession free of interference by a government having no probable cause and in the determined resistance to that interference,” Libertarian Party of Texas, Dallas, TX, July, 1997

The Gold Medal from the American Institute of Polish Culture for outstanding achievements in the field of medicine and discovery of anti-cancer drugs antineoplastons, Miami, FL, February, 1997

The Medal “Heart for Hearts” for saving human lives, Lublin, Poland, August, 1997

The Memorial Medal of Zamoyski’s Lyceum in appreciation of outstanding contribution to increase scientific ranking of the school, Lublin, Poland, November, 1997

The Heritage Award by Polish American Congress in recognition of extraordinary achievement in the research, treatment, and prevention of cancer, Chicago, IL, October, 1993

Special Medal from the Polish government’s Institute for Drug Research and Control for achievement in the field of cancer research, Bialvstok, Poland, September, 1989

Honorable Membership in the Academia del Medeterraneo, Rome, Italy, 1984

Recipient of commendation for Dedicated Service and for Personal Contribution made in the
Advancement of Medical Education, Research and Health Care, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, April, 1977

Recipient of Medical Doctor Diploma with Distinction, Medical Academy, Lublin, Poland, 1967

Co-winner of the prize for best paper presented at the 7th Conference of Polish Medical Student Research
Societies, Poanan, Poland, 1966

[5]
——————————————————————
Why do some Burzynski critics claim they are NOT a “group” when they comment on each others blogs?

“That’s why I like the idea of the campaign that Bob Baskiewicz has come up with to wish Dr. Burzynski a happy birthday this year, skeptic style:”

(Citing and linking to 1/4/2013 blog)

1/4/2013 – Bob Blaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz
Happy Birthday, Dr. Burzynski!
http://thehoustoncancerquack.com/2013/01/04/happy-birthday-dr-burzynski

3/15/2013 – Bob Blaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz

20130927-130436.jpg
https://twitter.com/gorskon/status/312601559647281154
retweeted David Gorski @gorskon Orac @oracknows (David H. Gorski) #sciencebasedmedicine

1/7/2013
Post #2 – rjblaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz (Bob Blaskiewicz) – Wisconsin – Thanks, PZ

Posted by PZ Myers 1/6/2013
Let’s make Houston cancer quack Burzynski pay!

1/7/2013
Post #2 – Robert Blaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz (Bob Blaskiewicz) –
“The Skeptics” non-group activity on Forbes:

[6]
——————————————————————

20130927-131712.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310589187797700608
Except YOU have NOT yet actually demonstrated that you believe in “interesting and civil discussions

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-133255.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310856694525730817
Bobby, please point out where the Declaration of Helsinki supports your tweet?
http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3
[7]
——————————————————————
Please point out where the National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports your tweet
http://m.cancer.gov/topics/factsheets/clinical-trials
[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-133912.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310923414175105024

20130927-135658.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311317995861442560
Do you mean THIS present ?

“Let’s make Houston cancer quack Burzynski pay!”

PZ Myers

“there is a plan to remind him of the grief he has caused”

“his snake oil”

“bilk people out of buckets of money”

“Crime does pay”

“This fraud”

“The Burzynski clinic is a place you go to die”

“The lies”

“his quackery”

20130928-015718.jpg
======================================
Let’s make Houston cancer quack Burzynski pay!
Posted by PZ Myers on January 6, 2013

——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/01/06/lets-make-houston-cancer-quack-burzynski-pay/
======================================
[7]
——————————————————————
Do you mean THIS St. Jude ?
St. Jude:
http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=403c6f9523e70110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD

2/15/2012 – the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has awarded St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital $4,314,800 for a childhood cancer survivor study

The new federal funds will be distributed by the National Cancer Institute (NCI)
http://cohen.house.gov/press-release/cohen-st-jude-receive-43-million-childhood-cancer-survivor-study

Burzynski does NOT receive Federal Funds

[7]
——————————————————————
Tax-Exempt: Receives Federal Grants / Funds
http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=b7e79bb8a0cf5110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD&cpsextcurrchannel=1
Burzynski does NOT receive Federal Grants

Burzynski is NOT Tax-Exempt

[7]
——————————————————————
Donations to St. Jude are tax deductible as allowed by law
http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=6f8afa3186e70110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD&vgnextchannel=2f62940504f9a210VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD

Burzynski donations can NOT be deducted from a U.S. Tax Return

[7]
——————————————————————
FORBES: St. Jude CEO – $742,718
http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-142722.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310964881253867521
THIS Phenylbutyrate (PB) ?

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

SODIUM PHENYLBUTYRATE was given an orphan drug designation by the FDA for use as an adjunct to surgery,
radiation therapy, and
chemotherapy
for treatment of individuals with
primary or recurrent malignant glioma

Cumulative List of all Products that have received Orphan Designation: Total active designations: 2002 Effective: 5/5/2009
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/forindustry/developingproductsforrarediseasesconditions/howtoapplyfororphanproductdesignation/ucm162066.xls
PHENYLBUTYRATE and SODIUM PHENYLBUTYRATE are listed alphabetically in the lower 1/4th of this document

Pubmed 110 entries
Sodium Phenylbutyrate
“Sodium Phenylbutrate (aka PB) …”
Sodium Phenylbutyrate (PB)

Year – Pubmed (110 entries)
1958 1st entry
1995 1st clinical trial
2001 Phase 1
2009 Phase 2
2012 Phase 3

Bob, you do know that the research only took off once Dvorit D. Samid (Burzynski I) learned about it from Burzynski, right ?

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-143624.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310979838372626432
THESE trials ?

2003 – 2006 Phase II preliminary reports

2003 – Phase II
Phase II study of antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 in patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma:

a preliminary report
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12718563
Drugs R D. 2003;4(2):91-101

recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma

antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1

6 months median duration of treatment
of all 12 patients

2 years / 33.3% – Survival

2 / 17% – alive and tumour free for over 5 years since initial diagnosis
from the start of treatment

5 years – 1 alive for more than
4 years – 1 alive for more than

Only mild and moderate toxicities were observed, which included
3 cases of skin allergy
2 cases of:
anaemia
fever
hypernatraemuia
single cases of:
agranulocytosis
hypoglycaemia
numbness
tiredness
myalgia
vomiting

2003 – Protocol – recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma

12 – Patients Accrued
10 – Evaluable Patients

2 / 20% – # and % of Patients Showing Complete Response
3 / 30% – # and % of Patients Showing Partial Response
3 / 30% – # and % of Patients Showing Stable Disease
2 / 20% – # and % of Patients Showing Progressive Disease

2004 – Phase II study of antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 in children with recurrent and progressive multicentric glioma :

a preliminary report
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15563234
Drugs R D. 2004;5(6):315-26

incurable recurrent and progressive multicentric glioma

antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 (ANP)

9 – patients’ median age

6 patients were diagnosed with pilocytic astrocytoma
4 with low-grade astrocytoma
1 with astrocytoma grade 2
1 case of visual pathway glioma, a biopsy was not performed due to a dangerous location

16 months – The average duration of intravenous ANP therapy
19 months – The average duration of oral ANP

1 patient was non-evaluable due to only 4 weeks of ANP and lack of follow-up scans
1 patient who had stable disease discontinued ANP against medical advice and died 4.5 years later

10 patients are alive and well from 2 to >14 years post-diagnosis

Only 1 case of serious toxicity of reversible tinnitus, of 1 day’s duration, was described

2004 – Protocol – incurable recurrent and progressive multicentric glioma

12 – Patients Accrued

33% – % of Patients Showing Complete Response
25% – % of Patients Showing Partial Response
33% – % of Patients Showing Stable Disease
0 / 0% – # and % of Patients Showing Progressive Disease

2005 – Phase II – Long-term survival of high-risk pediatric patients with primitive neuroectodermal tumors treated with antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15911929
Integr Cancer Ther. 2005 Jun;4(2):168-77

13 children with recurrent disease or high risk

6 (46%) survived more than 5 years

2005 – Protocol – recurrent disease or high risk

23% – % of Patients Showing Complete Response
8% – % of Patients Showing Partial Response
31% – % of Patients Showing Stable Disease
38% – % of Patients Showing Progressive Disease

2006 – Phase II – Targeted therapy with antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 of high-grade, recurrent, and progressive brainstem glioma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16484713
Integr Cancer Ther. 2006 Mar;5(1):40-7

Brainstem glioma carries the worst prognosis of all malignancies of the brain

Most patients with brainstem glioma fail standard radiation therapy and chemotherapy and do not survive longer than 2 years

Treatment is even more challenging when an inoperable tumor is of high-grade pathology (HBSG)
patients with inoperable tumor of high-grade pathology (HBSG) treated with antineoplastons in 4 phase 2 trials

39% – overall survival at 2 years
22% – overall survival at 5 years

17+ years maximum survival for a patient with anaplastic astrocytoma

5+ years for a patient with glioblastoma

39% – Progression-free survival at 6 months

5+ year survival in recurrent diffuse intrinsic glioblastomas and anaplastic astrocytomas of the brainstem in a small group of patients

18 – evaluable
4 – glioblastomas
14 – anaplastic HBSG
14 – diffuse intrinsic tumors
12 – recurrence
6 – did not have radiation therapy or chemotherapy

Antineoplastons, A10 (A10I) and AS2-1 injections
5 months median duration
Responses were assessed by gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography
Antineoplastons tolerated very well
1 case of grade 4 toxicity (reversible anemia)

2006 – Protocol – high-grade pathology (HBSG)

18 – Evaluable Patients

11% – % of Patients Showing Complete Response
11% – % of Patients Showing Partial Response
39% – % of Patients Showing Stable Disease
39% – % of Patients Showing Progressive Disease

Or did you expect Burzynski to publish the final clinical trial results before they were finished, Bob?

[7]
——————————————————————
2/24/2013
http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=1442
2/27/2013
http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=1798
3/9/2013
http://www.thetwentyfirstfloor.com/?p=8001

20130927-144527.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311091486349475840
Bobby, oh REALLY ?

“The Skeptics” (Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II)

The “group” “The Sketics” claims is NOT a “group” and which allegedly does NOT spread “misinformation”
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/the-skeptics

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-145729.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311524673819144192
No Bobby, you did NOT

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-151106.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311543395556409344
“VAMPIRE” ?

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-152320.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311594720373645312
Bobby, like THIS ?

Stanislaw Rajmund Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D and “Freedom of Speech”

“The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting ‘fire’ in a theater and causing a panic.”

United States Supreme Court ruled 3/3/1919

Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/stanislaw-rajmund-burzynski-m-d-ph-d-and-freedom-of-speech

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-153541.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311681213934997505
Bobby, like THIS ?
David H. Gorski and the Cult of “MISINFORMATION”
Colorado Public Television 12 – PBS: Part II
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/david-h-gorski-and-the-cult-of-misinformation
Orac and the Cult of “Misinformation” (Part III)
David H. Gorski
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/orac-and-the-cult-of-misinformation-part-iii
Josephine Jones and the Cult of Misinformation
JJ recently blogged:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/josephine-jones-and-the-cult-of-misinformation
Keir Liddle and the Cult of MISINFORMATION
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/keir-liddle-and-the-cult-of-misinformation
The Cult of “Misinformation”
Review of “disinformation,” “misinformation,” and “misdirection” posted by #Burzynski critics
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/the-cult-of-misinformation
The cult of “Misinformation” continued
Adam Jacobs
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/the-cult-of-misinformation-continued

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-164205.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311854061550960642
Bobby, where’s your
Citation(s),
Reference(s), and / or
Link(s) ?

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-165548.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311859126965788672
Bobby, Adam Jacobs does NOT care about “FREE SPEECH,” he censors it:
http://dianthus.co.uk/burzynski-qa

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-171713.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311931318629986305
Well, Bobby, We know a lot of the skeptics seem to “hate” the truth

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-174326.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312013682408292354
Bobby, maybe you should have actually watched THIS:

Burzynski Infomercial on Colorado PBS 12
http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=2401

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-174348.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312052091407433728
Bobby, maybe you should ACTUALLY listen to it

[7]
——————————————————————
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/31212153099585536

Yeah, riiiiiiiiight, Bobby
rjblaskiewicz:

“Response to the release of Burzynski 2, Havanna Nights”
http://t.co/t9WMpNRN9L
Skeptical Humanities

Learning is Cool

Response to the release of Burzynski 2, Havanna Nights

Posted by Bob

On this week’s episode of the Virtual Skeptics, I replied to what was learned at the premiere of the new Burzynski movie

The text of my segment follows the episode

This week, the new Burzynski movie premiered in San Luis Obispo, California

We largely knew what was going to be in the movie since a couple of trailers had been released, the patients who appeared had talked about the filming, and there was a sort of credulous review had appeared a few days ahead of time and I believe the director may have mentioned it on a PBS fundraising specual a few days earlier

So we had a pretty good idea of what our proxies should be looking for

We really wanted to see if certain people who had been filmed, like Amelia Saunders or Hannah Bradley appeared and especially what was said about them

We wanted lists of people who appeared, to see if we might be able to put together who said what

Most of these people’s stories are well known, and we doubted there would be anything new

Also our people took down key quotes that struck them as important, like

(those notes did NOT seem very “key” considering Orac’s (David H. Gorski @gorskon #sciencebasedmedicine @ScienceBasedMed @oracknows)

“Second-Hand” “review” of Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II)

“skeptics are hiding behind their BS free speech.”

(Yep, TRUE)

[7]
——————————————————————
This is my takeaway, after talking to the people who I know were there

We are wiggly little scumbags who are hateful and slimy

(some skeptics seem to be “hateful” of the truth)

[7]
——————————————————————
We ridicule the desperate and dying

Some of us are paid by big pharma

Others are deluded and think that we are doing good but are being misled

(that is a fair description of “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “misdirection”)

[7]
——————————————————————
But make no mistake–and this was hammered home to me by everyone I talked to–we are to them pure evil

One of my big concerns going into the movie was how I was going to be portrayed and whether or not I was going to receive death threats

That my family was going to receive death threats or that I was going to be harassed at work

I feared this because of a letter that, as you know, was sent to my employer promising that I would be featuring prominently in the Burzynski movie

[7]
——————————————————————
Nobody asked me for my opinion or to give a statement or to respond or clarify; they went straight to my boss

Maybe they figured out your “opinion” and didn’t need any “clarification”

[7]
——————————————————————
Fine

I’ve had wacky people contact my employers in the past

I fully expect it to happen in the future

Clips of this show, episode 13, were included in the movie

This is the episode that was quoted in the letter on my university chancellor

As it turned out, our faces were blurred, our names obscured, and our voices were altered

No real identifying information

Which, you know, I’m OK with

However, there are some problems here

1) What was served by contacting my employer other than to scare me

How dare the filmmakers say that we’re terrorizing people when they are doing just that

Filmmakers ?

[7]
——————————————————————
2) Someone asked me about a quote,

“we’re coming for you, you little polish sausage you.”

The thing is, the quote is patently absurd if my name is shown, something that everyone here jumped on, like I hoped you would during the original episode

That joking was not conveyed to the skeptics in the theater audience

This might be due to the fact that not only were we given scary voices but also that apparently every time we appeared scary music played in the background

That might be funny to you but maybe not to your Human Resources Department, and if that was “scary voices” and “scary music” to you, what’s the last scary movie you saw?

Scooby Doo, Where are You?

[7]
——————————————————————
It’s clear that the reason I’m in the movie in the capacity I am, as chief bad guy, is because I’m on video talking about the Burzynski Clinic

Are you sure it’s not because you are somewhere behind Gorski with the disinformation?

After all, he was invited to appear in the movie

Were you ?

[7]
——————————————————————
And this leads me to another thing that Brian mentioned

That when we kind of appeared on the screen, they put up a title card type thing that said,

“skeptical teleconference”

or something like that, and that a woman at the end of the show, wanted to know,

“How did you get this footage of these scheming skeptics?”

Um….we publicize our show constantly?

If you can’t have real clandestine drama, you might as well make it up

My favorite bit was a tweet that I got around this time where a new account who followed like 10 people I do said,

“It’s really interesting when you talk about Burzynski on the show

Could you do that more?”

Really, Eric?

(Do you know it was Eric ?

After all, you thought I was Eric)
Bob Blaskiewicz

[7]
——————————————————————
Yeah, I have a feeling it’s Merola

That’s just me though

He’s way too invested in the hashtag in his movie to just let it drop
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/blahg/2013/03/burzynski-another-fact-blind-troll-who-predicted-that/#comments

Do you think I’m two years old?
(Your “fact-checking” ability makes me wonder)

[7]
——————————————————————
I am interested in ultimately seeing it

I’m asking that the producer send a review copy to the James Randi Educational Foundation so a proper review can be done

(As if jref is a “reliable source”)

[7]
——————————————————————
Or you could screen it in Minneapolis

Next week works for me, Eric, if you’re free

I guess he wasn’t

[7]
——————————————————————
Another thing

News broke on the 7th of January in skeptical circles that the FDA was conducting an audit of the clinic

A patient in the movie apparently said that she had been receiving a brain scan when she heard that the Clinic was being investigated again

This means that material was added to the movie after the 7th of January

The Burzynski Birthday Fundraiser was announced by PZ Myers on the 6th

So there was more than enough time for the filmmaker to clarify exactly what was meant in that episode when I said that there was going to be a little present on his birthday

(That “present” PZ Myers was offering up ?)

[7]
——————————————————————
Skeptics evilly, and with malice aforethought, raised $14.5K dollars for St. Jude’s

We then challenged the Clinic to match us, and it didn’t

That the director did not mention this fact seems to me inexcusable, making us look like we are big meanos who hate babies and morality

(He could have mentioned your “Fave,” PZ Myers)

[7]
——————————————————————
This demonization is unfair and at the expense of the truth–if you ever read theotherburzynskipatientgroup blog you know whose side I’m on

P Z who ?

[7]
——————————————————————
If he used the video clip of us that he cited in his letter to my employer, about us bringing a “present” to Burzynski and knowing what it actually was without clarifying it, well, that just speaks to his regard for completeness and accuracy

I don’t think you really wanted P Z’s “present” “clarified”

[7]
——————————————————————
No messiah should need such fudging

It suggests to me that he’s forcing evidence into a pre-existing narrative of persecution

(And what do you call what YOU are doing ?)

[7]
——————————————————————
References:

PZ Myer’s announcement of the Houston Cancer Quack
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/01/06/lets-make-houston-cancer-quack-burzynski-pay/
The Virtual Skeptics episode that appears in the movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK-yF8w6nLo

RJB
rjblaskiewicz:

http://t.co/F79zndTjuZ

20130927-180817.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312234423288487936
Bob Blaskiewicz retweeted

20130927-181131.jpg
https://twitter.com/jref/status/312255856928509953
Bobby, did you know that I tried to post a comment on the James Randi Educational Funding (jref) article Written by Brian Thompson, about this, but they did NOT post my response ?

Did you post something about “FREE SPEECH” ?

“Burzynski II” Fails to Convince
Swift”
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/2050-qburzynski-iiq-is-more-of-the-same.html

[7]
——————————————————————
My 1st-hand Review of Orac’s 2nd-Hand Review – Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II

Burzynski critic Orac blogged about “Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II”
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/my-1st-hand-review-of-oracs-2nd-hand-review-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii

20130927-185417.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312998393259622402
Bobby, does this mean it will be punctuated correctly, but NOT “Fact-Checked” ?

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-183924.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313465677614817280
Bobby, it did NOT help

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-190018.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313496736708583424
rjblaskiewicz:
Not really. 🙂

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-191447.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313508346399428608
That’s what I thought, Bobby

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-191512.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313725494170361856

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-201335.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313741293576667137

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-192830.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310589187797700608
Bobby, what was that about
“many interesting and civil discussions” ?

[7]
——————————————————————
Bobby, you can’t always get what you want

But if you try sometime, you just might find

you get what you need

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-201740.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/314115938960154624
Bobby, let me guess

You are so busy tweeting about penises that you do NOT have enough time to “Fact-Check” ?

[7]
——————————————————————
You do know FDA required ?

” … in 1997, his medical practice was expanded to include traditional cancer treatment options such as
chemotherapy,
gene targeted therapy,
immunotherapy and
hormonal therapy
in response to FDA requirements that cancer patients utilize more traditional cancer treatment options in order to be eligible to participate in the Company’s
Antineoplaston CLINICAL TRIALS

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/724445/000091205702038660/a2091272z10qsb.txt

[7]
——————————————————————

20130927-202436.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/315972148684529664
Yes it does, Bobby
You’ve just been Insolently pwned

[7]
——————————————————————
Skeptical Humanities
Learning is Cool

A Letter to the PBS Ombudsman about CPT12′s Airing of
“Burzynski”
http://t.co/RxDZHDN2RM
Posted by Bob

PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler

“To understand the complexities and history involved takes a lot of work, far more than we could possibly expect of Mr. Getler”

(or, as I have proven, of YOU)
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/critiquing-bob-blaskiewicz-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii

[8]
——————————————————————
“That said, however, I do disagree with some of his conclusions”

(You could see that coming a mile away, couldn’t you?)

Getler starts off:

[ ” … It is about the decades-long struggle of a Polish-born physician and biochemist, Stanislaw Burzynski, who set up a clinic in Texas in 1976, to achieve acceptance for a cancer-cure therapy based on a treatment he developed based on what he calls “Antineoplastons.” [ANP]”

“I submit this is already wrong
There is little evidence that Burzynski is at all serious about developing antineoplastons for wider marketing”

THAT certainly explains the Phase III stuff

[8]
——————————————————————
“If that were true, surely he would have managed to have completed and published a single advanced trial in 35 years

Bob, who was ultimately in charge of the trials?

The FDA ?

[8]
——————————————————————
“If you look at the trials he’s been required to register at clinicaltrials.gov, you see over 60 trials, 1 completed, and none published

NONE”

Bobby, where is the
Citation(s),
Reference(s), and / or
Link(s)

that support your
“required to register”
statement ?

NONE ?

Are you a sociopath who thinks that people should believe you just because you blogged or twitted it ?

[8]
——————————————————————
“This is important because he is restricted to giving his ANP in clinical trials

But he apparently abandons his trials, almost all of them

This is not normal”

Bobby, how many is
“almost all of them” ?

[8]
——————————————————————
“He charges patients out the nose to participate in the clinical trials

This is not normal”

Does it cost as much as any of THESE ?

Cost cancer: The hospital wanted a $30,000 deposit
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-16/politics/health.care.hearing_1_health-insurance-post-claims-underwriting-individual-health?_s=PM:POLITICS
2008 – Cost cancer insurance: Avastin, made by Genentech, is a wonder drug. Approved for patients with advanced lung, colon or breast cancer, it cuts off tumors’ blood supply, an idea that has tantalized science for decades. And despite its price, which can reach $100,000 a year, Avastin has become one of the most popular cancer drugs in the world, with sales last year of about $3.5 billion, $2.3 billion of that in the United States. Avastin costs $50,000 a year and adds four months of life. “There is a shocking disparity between value and price,” he said, “and it’s not sustainable.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/health/06avastin.html?_r=0
Cost cancer chemo up-front: $45,000 to Come In
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120934207044648511.html?mod=2_1566_topbox#articleTabs%3Darticle
3/2012 – Total Cost of Cancer Care by Site of Service: Physician Office vs Outpatient Hospital (22 pages)
http://www.avalerehealth.net/news/2012-04-03_COA/Cost_of_Care.pdf
CHEMOTHERAPY:
9/24/2012 – The newspapers found hospitals are routinely marking up prices on cancer drugs by two to 10 times over cost. Some markups are far higher. • Levine Cancer Institute, owned by Charlotte-based Carolinas HealthCare, this year collected nearly $4,500 for a 240-milligram dose of irinotecan, a drug used to treat people with colon or rectal cancer. The average sales price for that amount of the drug: less than $60.
• Carolinas Medical Center-NorthEast in Concord was paid about $19,000 for a one-gram dose of rituximab, used to treat lymphoma and leukemia. That was roughly three times the average sales price.
• Forsyth Medical Center in Winston-Salem, owned by Novant Health, collected about $680 for 50 milligrams of cisplatin. The markup: more than 50 times the average sales price. Treating a cancer patient with Avastin, for instance, costs about $90,000 a year, doctors say

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/09/24/3549634/prices-soar-as-hospitals-dominate.html
5/14/2012 – Oral anti-cancer medications, on the other hand, are generally considered a pharmacy benefit. Instead of a co-payment, plan members often pay a percentage of the drugs’ cost — up to 50 percent, in some cases — with no annual out-of-pocket limit. And these drugs are expensive, often costing tens of thousands of dollars a year.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-05-14/national/35457286_1_lung-cancer-drug-drugs-work-multiple-myeloma-patients
RADIATION:
1/4/2013 – The new study was the most comprehensive cost analysis ever, and it compared the costs and outcomes associated with the various types of treatment for all forms of the disease, which ranged from $19,901 for robot-assisted prostatectomy to treat low-risk disease, to $50,276 for combined radiation therapy for high-risk disease.

http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2013/01/13370/how-prostate-cancer-therapies-compare-cost-and-effectiveness
3/15/2012 – Using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data, the researchers looked at 26,163 women with localized breast cancer who had undergone surgery and radiation from 2001 to 2005. They found that Medicare billing for IMRT increased from 0.9% of patients diagnosed in 2001 to 11.2% of women whose breast cancer was diagnosed in 2005.
The average cost for radiation treatment during the first year was $7,179 for non-IMRT and $15,230 with IMRT. Moreover, billing for IMRT was more than five times higher in regions across the nation where the local Medicare coverage determinations were favorable to IMRT compared to regions where coverage was unfavorable. sorafenib (Nexavar) in kidney cancer as an example. “NICE evaluated sorafenib as it was indicated for kidney cancer and determined that it indeed had value, but not $80,000 per year’s worth. The agency said that it would reimburse one-third of the total cost, and if the drug company wants to market their product to 60 million British citizens, they will need to be price flexible,”

http://www.ascopost.com/issues/march-15-2012/rising-costs-in-radiation-oncology-linked-to-medicare-coverage.aspx

http://cancer.disease.com/Treatment/Radiation-Therapy

Bob, did you watch Burzynski 2 and hear the lady talk about how much it was costing someone she knew for “traditional treatment ?

[8]
——————————————————————
“This is not the behavior of someone who intends to market the product widely later and expects a return on an investment

It sure looks like someone taking the money while he can”

THAT sure explains THIS 7/5/2012 Marketing and Consulting Agreement contract:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/724445/000110465912047927/a12-16018_1ex10d10.htm

[8]
——————————————————————
“I put the word “documentary” in quotes above because while the actual film does indeed document very well Burzynski’s seemingly endless battle to win acceptance and approval for his treatment against the FDA, National Cancer Institute, patent challenges and big pharmaceutical companies — and includes very powerful filmed interviews with cancer survivors who say his treatment (in Texas, where it was allowed) saved them — it doesn’t have the kind of critical other-side that one is used to in other documentaries

That last part is true
the movie is one-sided”

Bobby, you do know that Eric Merola offered oncologist and self-described researcher, David H. Gorski

(@gorskon @oracknows @ScienceBasedMed #sciencebasedmedicine http://www.scienceblogs.com/Insolence http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org)

the opportunity to appear in
Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II, and he REFUSED, right ?

[8]
——————————————————————
“Of course, why this is might be more apparent if Mr. Getler had realized that Merola’s cousin was a patient of Burzynski (she later died, of course) and that Merola raised funds for his cousin’s treatments on his website

Merola is not impartial

He has skin in the game

He has sunk an enormous amount into Burzynski”

Yeah, just like every other documentary film-maker or director of multiple movies re the same subject (Jaws, Terminator, Predator, Alien, etc.)

[8]
——————————————————————
“Mr. Getler mentions that Shari Bernson, the person responsible for the programming and who appeared in fundraising spots, described the movie as “controversial.”

To someone on the outside, it may appear to be controversial

To someone who understands the science and process of publication and who has found endless descriptions of how patients end up making really, really bad choices out of desperation at that clinic, however, there is no controversy”

The “controversy” is “The Skeptics” who do NOT know how to “Fact-Check,” and instead “Insert Foot in Mouth”

[8]
——————————————————————
“The fact remains that after 35+ years, the Clinic has never produced a single reproducible result that would constitute the barest minimum for serious consideration among experts

It just hasn’t”

That certainly explains the antineoplaston studies done in Poland, South Korea, Russia, Egypt, Japan, China, Taiwan (ROC), and the USA

That China published their most recent antineoplaston A10 study 10/1/2010
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
October 2010, Volume 286, Issue 1, pp 135-140
#Burzynski References: 5. – 6.

[8]
——————————————————————
The Randomized Japan study is scheduled for publication THIS year

“Should that ever happen (I’m not holding my breath), then, hell, yes, we’ll be on board cheering the advance of science”

“But he has to play by the rules

And this is important too, playing by the rules that all real researchers abide to

Part of the FDA’s job is to ensure that Burzynski’s people are doing this

And on February 7th, they were doing just that; they were in the facility inspecting to make sure that Burzynski’s team was playing by the rules

In a FOIA release this week, the FDA revealed a number of things that had been found out and reported to the clinic by the time the movie aired

By law, the Clinic had 15 days to respond, so if they responded, it was before CPT12′s love-in

(The observational notes can be found here:”
http://skepticalhumanities.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/burzynskiform483feb2013.pdf)

“Two investigators observed:”

“The IRB [Institutional Review Board] used an expedited review procedure for research which did not appear in an FDA list of categories eligible for expedited review, and which had not previously been approved by the IRB”

“Specifically, your IRB routinely provided expedited approvals for new subjects to enroll under Single Patient Protocols.”

“[2 adults and 3 pediatric patients are mentioned]”

“The IRB approved the conduct of research, but did not determine that the risks to subjects were reasonable in relation to the anticipated benefits (if any) to subjects, and to the importance of the knowledge that might be expected to result”

“Specifically, your IRB gave Expedited Approval for several Single Patient Protocols (SPP) without all the information necessary to determine that the risk to subjects are minimized.”

“[4 examples follow]”

“The IRB did not determine at the time of initial review that a study was in compliance with 21 CFR Part 50 Subpart D, ‘Additional Safeguards for Children in Clinical Investigations.’”

“Specifically, an IRB that reviews and approves research involving children is required to make a finding that the study is in compliance with 21 CFR Part 50 Subpart D, ‘Additional Safeguards for Children in Clinical Investigations.’”

“Your IRB approved research involving children without documentation of the IRBs finding that the clinical investigation satisfied the criteria under Subpart D.””

“[3 examples follow and there is a note that this is a repeat observation that had been found in an Oct 2010 Inspection.]”

“The IRB did not follow its written procedure for conducting its initial review of research”

“Specifically, the IRB is required to follow its written procedures for conducting initial and continuing review”

“Your IRB did not follow your written procedures for conducting initial and continuing review because these subjects received IRB approval via an expedited review procedure not described in your Standard Operating Procedures”

“If your IRB would have followed your own SOP for initial and continuing review, the following subjects would have received review and approval from the full board rather than an expedited review.””

“[2 adults and 3 pediatric patients are listed.]”

“The IRB has no written procedures for ensuring prompt reporting to the IRB, appropriate institutional officials, and the FDA of any unanticipated problems involving risks to human subjects or others”

“Specifically, your current SOP-2012 v2-draft doc does not describe the requirements on Investigators on how unanticipated problems are reported to the IRB, Institutional Official, and the FDA, such as time intervals and the mode of reporting, or otherwise address how the prompt reporting of such instances will be ensured.”

“The IRB has no written procedures [in the SOP-2012 v2-draft doc] for ensuring prompt reporting to the IRB, appropriate institutional officials, and the FDA of any instance of serious or continuing noncompliance with theses [sic] regulations or the requirements or determinations of the IRB.”

“A list of IRB members has not been prepared and maintained, identifying members by name, earned degrees, representative capacity, and any employment or other relationship between each member and the institution.”

“You have to play by the rules”

So, NOT as bad as THIS 9 pager ?
http://www.pharmalive.com/fda-warns-stem-cell-company-over-violations

Bob, you know these are just allegations, right ?

Not the final report ?

[8]
——————————————————————
“I’m not sure that this round of investigation is over yet, as the audience at the premier of the sequel was apparently told that the FDA was still on site”

“Researchers should not be playing fast and loose with the rules that protect children (a protected subject population, like prisoners and students–yeah, I’m IRB certified)”

“There should be procedures in place to see that proper oversight and reporting of unexpected events is ensured”

“Hell, there was apparently no document even saying WHO was on the IRB!”

“This is not a report on a serious research institution”

“It’s more like the observations of the IRB of a clown school”

How many more businesses with more IRB issues than Burzynski did you find during you intense “Fact-Finding” mission ?

Bob, did you read Burzynski’s publications with their notes about the IRB ?

“Back to Mr Getler’s letter:”

“On the other hand, Bernson’s sidekick on the in-studio, pledge-drive promotion who was interviewing the clinic spokesman, made me gag when she said,
“I’m Rebecca Stevens and I’m proud to be a journalist who asks the hard questions.”

There were no hard questions”

[I believe the question that followed up this statement was, “What is peer-review?”–RJB]

“And where Bernson may have gone too far, depending on who you believe, was in her statement that:

“Antineoplaston therapy has had significant success rates with terminal brain cancer patients and especially in children.”

No, she went too far no matter who you believe, and his next paragraph demonstrates this:”

“The National Cancer Institute, reporting last month on Antineoplastons, said, among other things:

“No randomized, controlled trials showing the effectiveness of antineoplastons have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals”
and that they are
“not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the prevention or treatment of any disease.”

Aaaand…how’s that controversial?

In light of this, how could Sherri possibly be right?

My bottom line is that CPT12 obviously has a right to show this film

Nobody questions that

“What we wanted, and what was offered to the station, was the opportunity to have an independent oncologist in the studio at the time of the broadcast, you know, to stir up the kind of informed discussion the station says they want to have instead of settling for two True Believers talking to two CPT12 pitch people”

“When the station had that opportunity, they walked away from it”

“That’s indefensible”

Bob, like your man-crush oncologist who refuses to debate ?

[8]
——————————————————————
“Especially when you consider that the people we are worried about, patients and their families, may NOT be as discerning as your average viewer, as CPT President Willard Rowland suggests in his response to the ombudsman:

“The program’s airing is grounded in the station’s mission, specifically those portions about respecting our viewers as inquisitive and discerning citizens, addressing social issues and public concerns not otherwise adequately covered in the community, and cultivating an environment of discovery and learning.”

Some of them haven’t had good news since their diagnosis”

“Then they hear that some lone genius with the cure for cancer is operating in Houston and they are on the next flight down”

“I’ve seen it dozens of times, and I have hundreds more patients on deck to write about”

“These are vulnerable, vulnerable people who deserve the best information from their public broadcasters”

“I’m fairly disappointed by the tepid response, honestly”

“I have a hard time imagining that Mr. Getler, or Mr Willard Rowland for that matter, could possibly think that this program was anything but misleading if they spent a half hour at The OTHER Burzynski Patient Group, which chronicles, in patients’ own words, what goes on in that Clinic”

“All of the people told that getting worse is getting better”

“(for decades being fed the same line!),

the children having strokes

(unrelated to their tumors)

while on the medicine, the “terrifying” amounts of sodium that go into patients”

“The quasi-legalistic threats and phone calls to dissatisfied cancer patients”

“The untested chemo cocktails given to most of his patients”

“None of that was mentioned in the CPT12 fundraiser”

“Of course, that’s not Mr. Getler’s fight”

RJB
http://skepticalhumanities.com/2013/03/26/a-letter-to-the-pbs-ombudsman-about-cpt12s-airing-burzynski
Maybe you should go here and explain the critics actions:
https://www.facebook.com/questions/488444654552853

[8]
——————————————————————
HoustonCancerQuack proclaims:

“Fact-checking Burzynski II”

“DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE AN OPEN MIND?”

“DO YOU HAVE THE ALL THE FACTS?”

Let’s find out if they have all the “FACTS,” shall we?

“Basic claims about ANP”

“Antineoplastons are chemotherapy, regardless of what supporters say”

Bob, it is NOT “ordinary” chemotherapy”

[9]
——————————————————————
“Toxicity, reactions, and even patient deaths can and do happen due to their administration”

FACT: Is any citation, reference, or link to an independent reliable source provided for this claim?

“patient deaths can and do happen due to their administration”

NO

FACT: This is only an “opinion” until it is supported by “FACTS”

Here is what the National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) lists as POSSIBLE “Adverse Effects”:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/antineoplastons/healthprofessional/page6

[9]
——————————————————————
“The most common side effect of ANP, hypernatremia, is an effect of the sodium in the mixture”

FACT: Is any citation, reference, or link to an independent reliable source provided for this claim?

NO

FACT: Is “HYPERNATREMIA” listed on the above National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) list as a possible “Adverse Effect”?

Let’s see what we can find out about “HYPERNATREMIA,” shall we?

2/13/2013 – The frequency, cost, and clinical outcomes of HYPERNATREMIA in patients hospitalized to a comprehensive cancer center
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/23404230
Division of Internal Medicine, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
Department of General Internal Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Division of Endocrinology, Mayo Clinic
Support Care Cancer. 2013 Feb 13. [Epub ahead of print]
(Supportive Care in Cancer)
DOI
10.1007/s00520-013-1734-6
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00520-013-1734-6
This 3 month study of 3,446 patients in 2006 found that most of the HYPERNATREMIA (90 %) was acquired during hospital stay

HYPERNATREMIA in the U.S.:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000394.htm
HYPERNATREMIA is the most common electrolyte disorder in the United States

In some cases, cancer may cause the condition

[9]
——————————————————————
“In order to maintain their doses of ANP, patients are required to drink obscene amounts of water every day (some report up to 12 quarts or more)”

“If they fail to do so, they may lapse into unconsciousness or die”

Let’s put this in perspective

FACT: Some sources indicate:

1) A man should drink about
3 liters (101.44 ounces / 3 quarts 5.44 ounces) per day
{12 quarts = 384 ounces = 11.356 liters}
[12 quarts in 24 hours = 1/2 quart or 16 ounces per hour]

2) Extremely healthy kidneys could process about 30 ounces (approx .9 liters) of water in an hour
{30 ounces in 24 hours = 720 ounces}
[720 ounces = 22.5 quarts per day]

3) A person with healthy kidneys could develop water intoxication by drinking about 2 to 3 times what their kidneys can process

So, if extremely healthy kidneys could process about 30 ounces per hour and 12 quarts per day would require one to only drink 16 ounces per hour, that means one is being asked to drink 14 ounces less per hour than what extremely healthy kidneys could process

So even if one drinks more than 16 ounces per hour so that one does not have to be awake hourly, there is still opportunity to do that

Of course, there are certain other factors that might have to be taken into consideration depending on the patient

“There are two cases of children (Haley S. and Elizabeth K.) at The OTHER Burzynski Patient Group who have had strokes unrelated to their tumors, likely because of the treatment”

FACT: Is any citation, reference, or link to an independent reliable source provided for this claim?

NO

FACT: Is “STROKE” listed on the above National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) list as a possible “Adverse Effect”?

FACT: This is only an “opinion” until it is supported by “FACTS”

[9]
——————————————————————
“For an example of a patient nearly overdosing, see Adam M’s story”

“Patients seem to often end up in the hospital because of the treatment”

FACT: Is any citation, reference, or link to an independent reliable source provided for this claim?

NO

FACT: Is “ENDING UP IN THE HOSPITAL” listed on the above National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) list as a possible “Adverse Effect”?

FACT: This is only an “opinion” until it is supported by “FACTS”

[9]
——————————————————————
“A surgical oncologist, researcher and patient advocate explains why physicians question Dr. Burzynski’s methods:”

My blog explains WHY I question this physician:
http://www.stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com

[9]
——————————————————————
“This physician and others declined to be interviewed for the movie because of Merola’s track record of slanted presentation and because of past threats issued by people hired by the Burzynski Clinic”

“Past threats issued by people hired by the Burzynski Clinic”?

FACT: Is any citation, reference, or link to an independent reliable source provided for this claim?

NO

FACT: This is only an “opinion” until it is supported by “FACTS”

excuses, Excuses, EXCUSES
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/david-h-gorskis-conspiracy-mongering-and-more-of-his-dr-stanislaw-burzynski-stories

[9]
——————————————————————
“What was the “present” from skeptics that was alluded to in the movie?”

“The “present” the Skeptics for the Protection of Cancer Patients (SPCP) delivered to Burzynski on his birthday, was a donation of $14,500 to St Jude Children’s Hospital for research into childhood cancers”

“They challenged Dr. Burzynski to match their donation”

“He did not”

“In fact, some of the interviews in the movie (conducted after the FDA inspection of the Burzynski Clinic, mentioned at the end) were filmed after the fundraiser had been announced, so Merola seems to have deliberately omitted the whole truth, because he certainly was aware of it”

“Doesn’t sound so sinister now, does it?”

“Also, Burzynski got a card”

Want to know what that “PRESENT” really was?

Critiquing Bob Blaskiewicz
(#Burzynski Cancer is Serious Business, Part II)

https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/critiquing-bob-blaskiewicz-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii

[9]
——————————————————————
“Are skeptics really calling out cancer patients, ridiculing and harassing them?”

You tell me:

20130927-203258.jpg
https://twitter.com/Ac2cSheila/status/186164592676843520

20130927-205132.jpg
https://twitter.com/RatbagsDotCom/status/304050113834262528

[9]
——————————————————————
“What about the 2-hour rejection from The Lancet?”

“The vast majority of papers that get rejected from The Lancet are rejected within 48 hours thanks to an editorial pre-screening process”

“Most researchers are thankful for this courtesy because it allows them to resubmit to other journals more quickly”

“Why does Merola try to convince the audience that this is evidence of a conspiracy against Burzynski?”

Why bring it up if you really have nothing to add that is relevant?

FACT: The Lancet Oncology will not discuss any submission that may or may not have been submitted to The Lancet Oncology with anyone other than the corresponding author

To do so would constitute a breach in confidentiality

20130927-211253.jpg
[9]
——————————————————————
“Patients pay a lot of money upfront to enter his clinical trials, presumably believing that the trials will eventually be published”

Is that really the patients’
motivation?

FACT: Is any citation, reference, or link to an independent reliable source provided for this claim?

NO

FACT: This is only an “opinion” until it is supported by “FACTS”

[9]
——————————————————————
“Burzynski has never published the results of those trials but keeps the money:”

Really?

Burzynski Clinical Trials (The SEC filings)
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/burzynski-clinical-trials-2

[9]
——————————————————————
“Burzynski’s abysmal trial completion record, over sixty abandoned trials, the trust of every patient who participated betrayed”

“If trial completion were a batting average, he’d be batting .016”

Really?

FACTS:
http://cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/search/results?protocolsearchid=11475951

http://cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/search/results?protocolsearchid=11476036

[9]
——————————————————————
“His publication average is .000”

“Really:”
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=burzynski&pg=1
REALLY?
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/david-h-gorskis-conspiracy-mongering-and-more-of-his-dr-stanislaw-burzynski-stories

[9]
——————————————————————
“Speaking of harassment…”

“Merola does not mention that skeptics only caught wind of the Burzynski story in November 2011, after a teenaged blogger critical of the Clinic received phony legal threats from someone who had been hired by the Clinic to “clean up” its reputation”

“This person, Marc Stephens, sent this high school student images of his family’s home, the message clearly:”

“We know where you live.”

“These threats were well documented in the international press”

“Somehow Merola managed to not mention that in the movie”

Maybe it wouldn’t be so bad if the loquacious “teenaged” high school student got his “FACTS” straight:

TheSkeptiCritic (@TheSkeptiCritic) tweeted at 8:12pm – 16 Apr 13:
https://twitter.com/TheSkeptiCritic/status/324329482712391680

http://rhysmorgan.co/blog

http://rhysmorgan.co/burzynski-morally-reprehensible

http://thewelshboyo.wordpress.com
[9]
——————————————————————
“What really happened to Amelia Saunders?”

“Merola suggests that Amelia Saunders died as a result of her parents taking her off of antineoplaston therapy, that there “confusion and disagreement” between the doctors in the UK and Houston’s reading”

Really?

20130927-205944.jpg
https://twitter.com/frozenwarning/status/312141313451634688

20130927-212352.jpg
https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312256370936266752

20130927-213845.jpg

20130927-222641.jpg
https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312264347277737984

20130927-214725.jpg

20130927-222605.jpg
https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312270472341487616
Burzynski Movie (@BurzynskiMovie) tweeted at 11:49pm – 14 Mar 13:
http://t.co/wxU2PHJ3GD

20130927-215629.jpg

20130927-222520.jpg
https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312425208462049280
[9]
——————————————————————
“We hope this makes it clear that what you are seeing in the new Burzynski movie may not be entirely reliable”

So … like your blog?

[9]
——————————————————————
“As we get more information about the claims in the movie, we will add additional rebuttals and provide context for understanding what really goes on at the Burzynski Clinic”
http://www.anp4all.com
I can’t wait
http://thehoustoncancerquack.com/fact-checking-burzynski-ii
[9]
======================================
Burzynski referenced by other doctors:

Phase II trial of tipifarnib and radiation in children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas
http://neuro-oncology.oxfordjournals.org/content/13/3/298.full
University of California—San Francisco
Children’s Hospital Boston, Massachusetts
St Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee
Seattle Children’s Hospital, Seattle, Washington
Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Children’s National Medical Center, Washington, DC
Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Ohio
Neuro Oncol (2011) 13 (3): 298-306
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noq202
5.723 Impact Factor
25. ↵ Burzynski SR
Treatments for astrocytic tumors in children: current and emerging strategies
Paediatr Drugs. 2006;8:167-178

http://link.springer.com/article/10.2165%2F00148581-200608030-00003
Pediatric Drugs
May 2006, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 167-178

[10]
——————————————————————
“[T]he emphasis in Phase 2 is on EFFECTIVENESS”

“Phase 3 studies begin if EVIDENCE of EFFECTIVENESS is shown in Phase 2″

[11]
——————————————————————
9-10/2009 – Stable disease is a valid end point in clinical trials
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19826356/
strong>10,675 – # of times “stable disease” found on PubMed
[12]
——————————————————————
costs (see above)

[13]
——————————————————————
rjblaskiewicz 1 week ago
(@rjblaskiewicz a/k/a Blatherskitewicz)

Mr. R.J. Blaskiewicz, is well known as:
“Bob Blaskiewicz, Faux Skeptic Exposed!”

There are numerous Internet pages and great pictures of him re Atlanta, Georgia, where he was called out, but hid behind his keyboard:

[14]
——————————————————————
Forbes – Waiting for the 10,000

Bob, I thought it funny that “The Skeptics” were allowed to comment freely on #Forbes, without citations, references, or links, while my comments were deleted

Did they ever have 10,000 views like Boris Ogon posted ?

[15]
——————————————————————
Forbes – rjblaskiewicz 6 days ago

“It’s not a thread about the inherent corruption throughout all of medicine.”

“It’s about some bully/man-child trying to shut up critics.”

Mr. rjblaskiewicz (also known as Bob Blaskiewicz), so, like Forbes was?

[16]
——————————————————————
c0nc0rdance – http://t.co/WDfUPtBpmz
56.�skeptical humanities
http://t.co/aMJ1HaUTfh
57.�skeptical humanities
http://t.co/EGhiG5WgQA
58.�skeptical humanities
http://t.co/Fwkd7x2E0C

Bob, how many times did y’all need to “mirror” the video ?

[17]
——————————————————————
David James (@stortskeptic) chat room
(@SkepticCanary)(@_JosephineJones)

Skeptic Canary – blogtalkradio

Man-crush

Freedom from Facts

Informed consent

Phenylbutyrate (PB)

Hypernatraemia

Skeptics are opposed to facts

Bob, you and Gorski did a great job of NOT cover these issues

BB claims his rbutr has been used to “Fair and utterly destroyed it,” in relation to “Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business

BB states:

“His son I believe trained in Poland”
Blatherskitewicz, with your phenomenal attention to detail, aren’t you positive?

BB mentions two (2) possible honorary professorships in China for Dr. Burzynski

Call in comments

[18]
——————————————————————
Faux Skeptic
Bob Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz)
6/3/13, 3:49 PM
@FauxSkeptic @bbc5live I believe he said, “Put up or shut up, you little bitch.” Something like that.

[19]
——————————————————————
March 29, 1996

Then United States Food and Drug Administration Commissioner, David Kessler told the American people:

1. We will eliminate unnecessary paperwork … that used to delay or discourage … cancer research … by non-commercial clinical investigators

2. The … FDA’s initiatives … will allow …the agency … to rely on smaller trials … fewer patients … if there is evidence … of partial response in clinical trials
I don’t want to get into any particular … agent … except let me point out … that … the information needs to be part … of clinical trials
3. We will accept … less information … up front –

4. we’re going to require further study AFTER … approval … because the science … has matured

5. The important – point … is that information needs to be gathered … through scientific means … through clinical – trials … and I think – that’s … that’s very important uhh very … important point
You can’t … just … use an agent here – or there … you have to use it … as part of a clinical trial … so we can get information … on whether the drug works

6. The uhh agency has … many … trials … has has approved trials … for patients … with antineoplastons

7. We are committed to providing expanded access … availability … for American patients for any drug … there’s reason to believe … may work
—————————————————————
A. What is the FDA’s definition of “unnecessary paperwork”?

B. What is the FDA’s definition of “smaller trials”?

C. What is the FDA’s definition of “fewer patients”?

D. What is the FDA’s definition of “evidence … of psrtial response”?

E. What is the FDA’s definition of “less information … up front”?

F. What is the FDA’s definition of “we’re going to require further study AFTER … approval”?

G. What is the FDA’s definition of “We are committed to providing expanded access … availability … for American patients for any drug … there’s reason to believe … may work”?

[20]
——————————————————————
?
Oncologist

Survival rate 776 15%

2 1/2 million pages

Phase 3 radiation

Lancet

1652 / 335 = 1,799

Accelerated approval

Bob, at least we talked about some of these

[21]
——————————————————————
IRB – FDA

Burzynski’s publications sometimes mentioned IRB was agreed on per FDA

[22]
——————————————————————
Bob Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz) tweeted at 10:44am – 31 Jul 13:

@TomLemley1 @AceofSpadesHQ @mikespillane The FDA won’t approve his drug until he ever finishes and publishes a trial. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?te…

20130927-230121.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/362599624596393984

[23]
——————————————————————
Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz, Professor
Bob Blaskiewicz Faux Skeptic Exposed!
@rjblatherskiewicz
Blatherskitewicz
University of Wisconsin
rbutr
r-but-r
Eau Claire, Wisconsin
——————————————————————
http://www.skepticalhumanities.com/
——————————————————————
http://virtualskeptics.com/
——————————————————————
http://rbutr.com/
——————————————————————
http://blog.rbutr.com/
——————————————————————
http://www.uwec.edu/Staff/blaskir/
——————————————————————
http://www.csicop.org/author/rblaskiewicz
——————————————————————
http://necss.org/speakers/bob-blaskiewicz/
——————————————————————
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/speakers/blaskiewicz_bob
——————————————————————
http://lanyrd.com/2013/tam/sckkdy/
======================================
http://thehoustoncancerquack.com/

[24]
——————————————————————
Critiquing https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com

[25]
——————————————————————
25. 6/20/2013 Mark Burger published a review:
——————————————————————
http://www.yesweekly.com/triad/article-16162-burzynski-cancer-is-.html
——————————————————————
As could be expected, The Skeptics™
showed up
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “I’m afraid you’ve fallen for Dr Burzynski’s PR efforts here”
——————————————————————
LIE: The documentary film is by Eric Merola, NOT “Dr. Burzynski’s Public Relations”
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “In reality, Dr B is a quack and a charlatan of the worst order, and the movie is nothing more than a desperate attempt to try to sell his snake oil to the gullible”
——————————————————————
LIE: After reading through the comments, this sounds like the infamous lying Professor Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz of University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire, “infamy”, who is a charlatan of the first order, and belabors his ignorance by referring to “snake oil”, which as far as I know, has never been approved for phase III clinical trials, unlike Dr. Burzynski’s antineoplastons A10 (Atengenal) and AS2-1 (Astugenal)
——————————————————————
Bob Blaskiewicz (Blatherskitewicz), Faux Skeptic Exposed!:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/bob-blaskiewicz-blatherskitewicz-faux-skeptic-exposed/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “You have to ask why he’s never published any data showing that his treatment works”
——————————————————————
LIE: What people should ask is why does “Professor” @rjblaskiewicz and his other Skeptic pals continue posting idiotic statements like this on the Internet and social media (Twitter) ?
——————————————————————
Critiquing David H. Gorski, MD, PhD, FACS
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/david-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/21/critiquing-david-h-gorski-md-phd-facs-www-sciencebasedmedicine-orgeditorial-staffdavid-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “Well, if you believe everything the movie tells you, then perhaps you think it’s because of a huge global conspiracy that prevents him from publishing in any journal anywhere in the world”
——————————————————————
If you want to talk Jesse Ventura type “conspiracy theory”:

1. Why are The Skeptics™ like you too afraid to debate ?

2. Why did your “pal” David H. “Orac” Gorski, MD, PhD, FACS block me on his blog for questioning his infallibility ?

3. Why did Forbes delete my comments when I questioned The Skeptics™? regarding your “pal” Gorski’s “bud”, Peter A. Lipson, MD’s article ?

4. Why did The Skeptics™ Josephine Jones block me from her blog ?

5. Why did The Skeptics™ Adam Jacobs block me from his blog ?

6. Why did The Skeptics™ Guy Chapman block me from his blog ?

7. Why did The Skeptics™ Keir Liddle block me from his blog ?

8. Why do The Skeptics™ whine to Twitter in order to get Twitter to suspend the accounts of people who question them ?

9. Why did Wikipedia block me, using lame excuses ?

10. Why did reddit act like wiki’s little bitch and delete my posts and block my comments because this reddiot davidreiss666 whined like a little bitch ?
——————————————————————
overview for DidymusJudasThomas (reddit.com)

submitted 4 days ago by davidreiss666 to reportthespammers

1 comment
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “Even if you are sufficiently conspiracy minded to believe that’s true, then it still doesn’t explain why he hasn’t published his results on the clinicaltrials dot gov website, where most of his trials are recorded as either “ongoing”, “withdrawn”, or “unknown status””
——————————————————————
Did you NOT appear on the below blog talk radio show with your “pal” Gorski who said at 29:00 that Burzynski should NOT publish the information himself ?
——————————————————————
Ep09 – Talking Burzynski – David Gorski and Bob Blaskiewicz 05/29/2013
Skeptic Canary Show – BlogTalkRadio
May 29, 2013 … This week, join your hosts as we talk about Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski and the Burzynski Clinic. Well be joined by two special guest, Doctor David Gorski and Bob Blaskiewicz
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/…/ep09–talking-burzynski–david-gorski-and-bob-blaskiewicz
——————————————————————
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/skepticcanary/2013/05/29/ep09–talking-burzynski–david-gorski-and-bob-blaskiewicz
——————————————————————
http://goo.gl/7pWIj
——————————————————————
http://bit.ly/15lv5zG
——————————————————————
Critiquing the #SkepticCanary: “The Skeptics™” (SkeptiCowards©) Bob Blatherskitewicz and the so-called, “self-proclaimed” “CANCER RESEARCHER”:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/critiquing-the-skepticcanary-the-skeptics-skepticowards-bob-blatherskitewicz-and-the-so-called-self-proclaimed-cancer-researcher/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “Only one of his trials is recorded as being completed, and that one doesn’t reveal it’s results”
——————————————————————
Did you notice that your above 5/29/2013 appearance was BEFORE this article was published 6/20/2013 ?
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “The fact is that Burzynski keeps is actual research data an extremely closely guarded secret”
——————————————————————
Like THIS ?
——————————————————————
Critiquing: Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski, M.D., Ph.D, L.I.A.R.:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/critiquing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-l-i-a-r/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “If is treatment were actually effective, do you seriously think he’d do that?”
——————————————————————
RATS!!!. Like this ?
——————————————————————
Burzynski: Oh, RATS!!!
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/the-lancet-oncology-peer-review-team-d-12-01519-fail-2/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “Burzynski likes to cultivate his conspiracy theories because it helps his business of scamming vulnerable cancer patients”
——————————————————————
Is that like The Skeptics™ like to LIE to people ?
——————————————————————
Critiquing: In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski “cancer cure” is reviewed…with Insolence:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/critiquing-in-which-the-latest-movie-about-stanislaw-burzynski-cancer-cure-is-reviewed-with-insolence-2/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “For Burzynski, at least, cancer is indeed serious business”
——————————————————————
And for you, it must be a joke, considering how you are too much of a coward to debate questions like these
——————————————————————
QUESTIONS the Critics and Cynics, “The Skeptics™” do NOT want to ANSWER:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/23/questions-the-critics-and-cynics-the-skeptics-do-not-want-to-answer/
======================================
JEFF: “it has been tested independently in other countries, as the film shows”
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “The Japanese study remains unpublished, Jeff, just like all the over 60 studies Burzynski has started”

“Even if it were published, it would need to be replicated”
——————————————————————
Really ? Why not try pointing out where these studies were replicated before the FDA allowed these drugs to be used ?
——————————————————————
Burzynski: Why has the FDA NOT granted Accelerated Approval for Antineoplastons A10 (Atengenal) and AS2-1 (Astugenal) ?
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/burzynski-why-has-the-fda-not-granted-accelerated-approval-for-antineoplastons-a10-astengenal-and-as2-1-astugenal/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “Merola manipulated by voice, face and even what I said in his movie and never asked for my comments”

“Sure, he misrepresented me to my new employers, but that doesn’t actually count as consulting me, now does it?”

“The “birthday surprise” in the movie was a fundraiser for a children’s cancer research hospital that raised over $15K, something I’m rather proud of, actually”
——————————————————————
Nice TRY with your LIE
——————————————————————
Critiquing Bob Blaskiewicz (#Burzynski Cancer is Serious Business, Part II):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/critiquing-bob-blaskiewicz-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “I’d encourage you to look at the other side of the story at The OTHER Burzynski Patient Group”

“These are far more typical outcomes”
——————————————————————
Do you mean this one of a number of your blogs which I just critiqued ?
——————————————————————
Critiquing https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/critiquing-httpstheotherburzynskipatientgroup-wordpress-com/
======================================
ANONYMOUS: “You might also see what Merola got wrong/faked at the anp4all website”
——————————————————————
Oh, do NOT worry

I will critique this one also, and let people see what YOU got wrong
======================================
The Burzynski Skeptics:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/the-burzynski-skeptics/
======================================
CHEEZ WHIZ !!! http://anp4all.com is nothing more than Robert J. “Bob” Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz)’s thick processed cheese spread of http://thehoustoncancerquack.com
======================================
Where he asks:

DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE AN OPEN MIND? DO YOU HAVE THE ALL THE FACTS?
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/fact-checking-httpthehoustoncancerquack-com/
======================================
He is supposedly a “Professor of Writing”, but check out his writing gaffes here, as “ANONYMOUS”
======================================
Yes! Weekly: Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business Part II:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/yes-weekly-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii/
======================================
Critiquing https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/critiquing-httpstheotherburzynskipatientgroup-wordpress-com/
======================================
“The skeptic who called Dr. Burzynski “my little Polish sausage” has a Polish last name, which the director Eric Merola scrubbed from the movie”

Just because you think that referring to someone as:

“my little Polish sausage”

is humorous, and therefor we should excuse your behavior because of your below excuse, does NOT mean that it makes it acceptable

“Literally one second after he said that, all of the other participants made jokes about that fact”

(which of course was the point)

“Instead allowing the audience to hear that ribbing, Merola inserted an evil laugh, which was lifted and spliced from minute 18:25 of Virtual Skeptics episode 13”

If you thought that was an “evil laugh”, you’ve got an overactive imagination

“Voices were altered to sound sinister, and menacing music was added”

If you thought voices sounded “sinister” and that was “menacing music”, you must not watch any scary movies

Do you think this is a fair representation or were you misled?

YES

I think it’s a fair representation that you try to mislead people

“What about the 2-hour rejection from The Lancet?”

“High impact journals like The Lancet receive huge numbers of submissions, as their journal is the most prestigious”

“The vast majority of papers that get rejected by The Lancet are rejected within 48 hours thanks to an editorial pre-screening process that helps accommodate this huge work load”

“Most researchers are thankful for this courtesy because it allows them to resubmit to other journals more quickly”

“Why does Merola try to convince the audience that this is evidence of a conspiracy against Burzynski?”

All of your above comments prove what a waste of time you are, based on:
======================================
See #13
——————————————————————
Critiquing: In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski “cancer cure” is reviewed…with Insolence:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/critiquing-in-which-the-latest-movie-about-stanislaw-burzynski-cancer-cure-is-reviewed-with-insolence-2/
======================================
2 hours 8 minutes and 51 seconds
The Lancet Oncology Peer Review Team D-12-01519: #FAIL

——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/the-lancet-oncology-peer-review-team-d-12-01519-fail/
======================================
“Does Eric Merola have any conflicts of interest that he is not disclosing?”

“Eric Merola does not reveal a possible conflict of interest, one that a journalist would feel obliged to share”

“He fails to disclose in the movie that his cousin was a patient of Dr. Burzynski and that he has raised money on his movie’s website for patients to see Burzynski”

Sounds like someone failed to read the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section on the BurzynskiMovie web-site:
======================================
http://burzynskimovie.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=75&Itemid=55
======================================
“Burzynski has never published the results of those trials but keeps the money:”

“Burzynski’s abysmal trial completion record, over sixty abandoned trials, the trust of every patient who participated betrayed”

“If trial completion were a batting average, he’d be batting .016”

“His publication average is .000.”

“Really:”
——————————————————————
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=burzynski&pg=1
——————————————————————
Really ?

“over sixty abandoned trials” ?

This just shows that you do NOT even know the subject-matter

Have you even bothered to read Burzynski’s publications ?
======================================
Burzynski updates Scientific Publications page:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/burzynski-updates-scientific-publications-page/
======================================
Because if you had, you would know that Burzynski has used the clinical trial design proposed by Fleming
======================================
16. 2003 Trial design – Fleming (Pg. 94)
——————————————————————
17. 2004 Trial design – Fleming (Pg. 317)
======================================
Protocol Design

2-stage phase II clinical trial design proposed by Fleming used

Initially, 20 adequately treated patients to be assessed

If less than one Objective Response (Complete Response (CR) or Partial Response (PR)) observed, it’d be concluded there was less than desired activity and study would be discontinued

If one or more Objective Responses observed, 20 more patients would be accrued to study

If 4 or more responses observed among 40 patients, evidence would be sufficient to conclude the treatment has desired activity
======================================
One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7082756/
Journal
Biometrics. 1982 Mar;38(1):143-51
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/7082756/

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2530297?uid=3739256&uid=2460338175&uid=2460337855&uid=2&uid=4&uid=83&uid=63&sid=21102589296903
======================================
“This person, Marc Stephens, sent this high school student images of his family’s home, the message clearly:”

“We know where you live.”

“These threats were well documented in the international press”

“Somehow Merola managed to not mention that in the movie”

Yes

Marc Stephens’ actions were idiotic

My personal opinion is that he should have done what I am doing, which is showing how “The Skeptics™ lie, misinform, disinform, misdirect, deceive, misrepresent, etc.

Eric Merola did NOT mention your lame blogs either

Why don’t you complain about that ?

“Burzynski has a long history of patients believing that symptoms of getting worse are signs they are getting better”

“Follow any of the links at that site to hear how, in patients’ own words, this EXACT SAME misleading interpretation has been fed to patients for decades”

So, are you a doctor ?

No ?

I didn’t think so, quack

“Merola has publicly slandered Burzynski critics in a way a real journalist couldn’t”

Why can “real journalists” NOT slander someone ?

“We hope this makes it clear that what you are seeing in the new Burzynski movie may not be entirely reliable”

So, like this web-site
======================================
DEBATE E-Mails:
======================================
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Didymos Thomas wrote:
So now you’re brave ?

Bob Blaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz

@PDJudasT @robertquickert Hey, Judas. I have no respect for you as a person. Never address me.
1:56 PM – 18 Mar 2013
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313725494170361856
——————————————————————
On Monday, September 23, 2013, Robert Blaskiewicz wrote:
You going to be a rotten little troll or do you want to debate?
——————————————————————
You’re the one who posted this on Twitter

Do NOT try to make me the COWARD

Bob Blaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz

@PDJudasT @robertquickert Hey, Judas. I have no respect for you as a person. Never address me.
1:56 PM – 18 Mar 2013
——————————————————————
2/13/2013 (7/2013)
The frequency, cost, and clinical outcomes of HYPERNATREMIA in patients hospitalized to a comprehensive CANCER center

Over 3 month period in 2006 re 3,446 patients, most of the HYPERNATREMIA (90 %) was acquired during hospital stay
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23404230
——————————————————————
6/3/2013 – “[I]f I had screwed up, I would have admitted it”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/stanislaw-burzynski-propaganda-versus-news
“Our only goal is to promote high standards of science in medicine”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/
11/.2/2012 – “Personally, having pored over Burzynski’s publications … “
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/02/stanislaw-burzynski-fails-to-save-another-patient/
5/8/2013 – “I’ve searched Burzynski’s publications … “
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/08/eric-merola-and-stanislaw-burzynskis-secret-weapon-against-the-skeptics-fabio-lanzoni-part-2/
5/31/2013 – “Burzynski has a contingent of defenders who have targeted skeptics like me for special abuse, up to and including harassing me at work by calling my university to complain about my online verbiage critical of Burzynski and implying that I am somehow doing something wrong”
“(My university quickly realized that I was not.)”

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/
6/5/2013 – “ … I do know cancer science”
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/
6/7/2013 – “Unlike Mr. Merola, I am indeed very concerned with getting my facts correct”
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/07/i-want-my-anp/
.3/14/2013 – “Temodar and Avastin both had proper, completed, and published phase II trials before approval”
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/burzynski-cancer-is-a-serious-business-part-2-like-the-first-burzynski-movie-only-more-so/
and
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/03/14/five-things-i-learned-second-hand-from-the-recent-screening-of-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-2/
I prove him wrong
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/27/wayne-state-university-detroit-michigan-quickly-realized-that-david-h-gorski-md-phd-facs-is-not-doing-something-wrong-when-he-lies-about-burzynski/
——————————————————————
6/4/2013 – “Dr. Elloise Garside, a research scientists, echoes a lot of the questions I have, such as”

“how Burzynski never explains which genes are targeted by antineoplastons … “
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/04/stanislaw-burzynski-versus-the-bbc/
I prove him wrong
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/critiquing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-l-i-a-r/
and
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/21/critiquing-the-institute-of-medicine-report-on-cancer-care-is-the-system-in-crisis/
——————————————————————
Bob, this is unsupported, just like when Gorski put it on his blog:
Bob Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz) tweeted at 10:44am – 31 Jul 13:

@TomLemley1 @AceofSpadesHQ @mikespillaneThe FDA won’t approve his drug until he ever finishes and publishes a trial.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?te…

20130928-141235.jpg
https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/362599624596393984
Bob, “unable to publish”? Shouldn’t that be “able to publish” but The Lancet Oncology would NOT publish?
——————————————————————
Manuscript reference number: THELANCETONCOLOGY-D-12-01519

Title: Glioblastoma multiforme: a report of long-term progression-free survival and overall survival of 8 to 16 years after antineoplaston therapy and review of literature

Dear Dr. Burzynski,

Thank you for your recent submission to The Lancet Oncology. We have now had time to consider your manuscript and unfortunately, on this occasion, we have decided not to publish it because we believe the message would be better elsewhere.

Although the decision has not been a positive one, I thank you for your interest in the journal and hope it does not deter from considering us again in the future

Josephine Jones (@_JosephineJones) tweeted at.5:21pm – 11.Sep.13:

@Majikthyse @frozenwarning @drpaulmorgan @dianthusmed @oracknows It was about 1hr30 mins into Burzynski Movie II. pic.twitter.com/8n3fQkX0v0

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BT6kM-zCcAAHsnV.png

https://twitter.com/_JosephineJones/status/377919961659764736
Eric Merola revealed in Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II (2), at (1:29:53), that The Lancet Oncology Peer Review Team D-12-01519, in 2 hours 8 minutes and 51 seconds, refused to publish Burzynski’s 11/26/2012 phase 2 clinical trial Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) re patients 8 – 16 years after diagnosis, results
——————————————————————
Temozolomide received accelerated approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration 1/1999 for treatment of ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA (brain cancer) patients

At time of approval, NO RESULTS were available from randomized controlled trials in refractory ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA that show clinical benefit such as improvement in disease-related symptoms or prolonged survival
http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/11/19/6767.full
Was the United States Food and Drug Administration’s 1/1999 accelerated approval based on the PUBLISHED FINAL RESULTS OF A PHASE II (2) CLINICAL TRIAL?

12/2000 – Temozolomide and ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA:

NO CLEAR PROOF OF EFFICACY
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11475493/
NO BETTER THAN SURVIVAL BEFORE THE INTRODUCTION OF temozolomide

The answer is: NO

1/1999 – FDA Accelerated Approval

9/1999 – Phase 2 publication

9/1999 – Multicenter phase II trial of temozolomide in patients with ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA or anaplastic oligoastrocytoma at first relapse

Temodal Brain Tumor Group
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10561351/
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
http://www.drugs.com/pro/temodar.html

http://www.temodar.com/temodar/index.do
2004 – Supratentorial high-grade ASTROCYTOMA and DIFFUSE BRAINSTEM GLIOMA:

two challenges for the pediatric oncologist
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15047924/

http://m.theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/2/197.long
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

administration of temozolomide after RT DIDN’T ALTER POOR PROGNOSIS associated with newly diagnosed diffuse BRAINSTEM GLIOMA in children

1/1/2005 (11/24/2004) – Role of temozolomide after radiotherapy for newly diagnosed diffuse BRAINSTEM GLIOMA in children:

results of a multiinstitutional study (SJHG-98)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15565574

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/abstract;jsessionid=6717837591CCC8FCBD8E46163808E221.d03t01

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/full
administration of temozolomide after RT DIDN’T ALTER POOR PROGNOSIS associated with newly diagnosed diffuse BRAINSTEM GLIOMA in children

Avastin (Bevacizumab):

5/6/2009 – U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval of Avastin (bevacizumab) for people with GLIOBLASTOMA (brain cancer) with progressive disease following prior therapy

effectiveness of Avastin in AGGRESSIVE form of BRAIN CANCER based on improvement in objective response rate

Currently, NO DATA available from randomized controlled trials demonstrating improvement in disease-related symptoms or increased survival with Avastin in GLIOBLASTOMA
http://www.drugs.com/newdrugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-avastin-combination-paclitaxel-chemotherapy-first-line-advanced-852.html
According to FDA analysis of study

Study AVF3708g

Study NCI 06-C-0064E
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/druginfo/fda-bevacizumab

http://www.drugs.com/newdrugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-avastin-brain-cancer-glioblastoma-has-progressed-following-prior-1342.html
COMPARE COMBINED:

ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA

22% – Objective Response: Objective response = complete response and partial response – Antineoplastons

22% – response rate: Temodar

11% – Complete Response: Antineoplastons

9% – Complete Response rate: Temodar

17+ years – Maximum Survival : patient with ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA – Antineoplastons

50 weeks (16-114 weeks) – Median duration of all responses: Temodar

17+ years – Maximum Survival : patient with ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA – Antineoplastons

64 weeks (52-114 weeks) – Median duration of Complete Response: Temodar

6 months – 7 / 39% Progression-Free Survival: Antineoplastons

4.4 months – Median Progression-Free Survival: Temodar

5 years – 4 / 22% Overall Survival: Antineoplastons

2 years – 7 / 39% Overall Survival: Antineoplastons

2 years – Most patients with brainstem glioma fail standard radiation therapy and chemotherapy and do not survive longer

15.9 months (1 year 3.9 months) – Median Overall Survival: Temodar

COMPARE COMBINED:

GLIOBLASTOMA

39% – Progression-Free Survival (PFS) at 6 months: Antineoplastons

5.28 months – Median Progression-Free Survival (PFS): Antineoplastons

11.3 months – Progression-Free Survival: Avastin

32% – % of Patients Showing Objective Response = complete response and partial response: Antineoplastons

26% – tumor responses observed Avastin

42% – special exception (SE): Overall survival (OS) – 2 years: Antineoplastons

36% – BT-11: Overall survival (OS) – 2 years: Antineoplastons

19% – special exception (SE): Overall survival (OS) – 5 years: Antineoplastons

25% – BT-11: Overall survival (OS) – 5 years: Antineoplastons

4.2 months – Median duration of response in patients: Avastin

9 / 32% – # and % of Patients Showing Objective response = complete response and partial response – Antineoplastons

11 / 20% of patients – Responses were observed: Avastin

5+ years – Maximum Survival : patient with GLIOBLASTOMA – Antineoplastons

3.9 months – Median duration of response: Avastin
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/burzynski-why-has-the-fda-not-granted-accelerated-approval-for-antineoplastons-a10-astengenal-and-as2-1-astugenal/
Do “The Skeptics” believe Burzynski’s data will change from what he’s provided previously, in any FINAL phase 2 pub ?
——————————————————————
2004 – Cited by Burzynski

3/15/1999 – 40 / 30.9% – ARM 1: 1 year Patients Surviving: Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 17 / 27.0% – ARM 2: 1 year Patients Surviving: Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 6 months – ARM 1: Median time to Disease Progression: Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 5 months – ARM 2: Median time to Disease Progression: Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 8.5 months – ARM 1: Median Overall Survival from start of Treatment (OST): Median time to Death: Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 8.5 months – ARM 1: Median time to Death: Median Overall Survival from Diagnosis (OSD): Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 8 months – ARM 2: Median Overall Survival from Diagnosis (OSD): Median time to Death: Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 8 months – ARM 2: Median Overall Survival from start of Treatment (OST): Median time to Death: Protocol – easier to treat cases of newly diagnosed BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA patients: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 8 months – ARM 2: Median time to Death: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992 – 10/1997)

3/15/1999 – 8.5 months – Median Survival (MST): standard radiation therapy in combination with chemotherapy (RAT) (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997) children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM TUMORS: results of pediatric oncology group
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/critiquing-httpstheotherburzynskipatientgroup-wordpress-com/
There is no role for hyperfractionated radiotherapy in the management of children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic brainstem tumors: results of a Pediatric Oncology Group phase III trial comparing conventional vs. hyperfractionated radiotherapy
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10192340/
======================================
REFERENCES:
======================================
[1] – 3/9/2013 – March 4 at 7:58pm – Colorado Public Television – PBS:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/colorado-public-television-pbs/
======================================
[2] – 3/10/2013 – March 5 at 12:25pm – CPT12 – The Cult of “Misinformation”:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/the-cult-of-misinformation/
======================================
[3] – 3/12/2013 – CPT12 – FACTS Burzynski critics do NOT like:
——————————————————————
[4] – 3/12/2013 – CPT12
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/facts-burzynski-critics-do-not-like/
======================================
[5] – 3/17/2013 – Critiquing the Critics on Orac’s Respectful Insolence blog: Part II:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/17/critiquing-the-critics-on-oracs-respectful-insolence-blog-part-ii/
======================================
[6] – 3/24/2013 – “The Skeptics” (Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/the-skeptics/
======================================
[7] – 3/25/2013 – Critiquing Bob Blaskiewicz (#Burzynski Cancer is Serious Business, Part II):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/critiquing-bob-blaskiewicz-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii/
======================================
[8] – 3/26/2013 – My Critique of Bob Blaskiewicz (Colorado Public Television – PBS CPT12):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/my-critique-of-bob-blaskiewicz-colorado-public-television-pbs-cpt12/
======================================
[9] – 4/18/2013 – Fact-checking http://thehoustoncancerquack.com
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/fact-checking-httpthehoustoncancerquack-com/
======================================
[10] – 4/24/2013 – Burzynski referenced by other Cancer researchers:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/burzynski-referenced-by-other-cancer-researchers/
======================================
[11] – 4/24/2013 – Burzynski: The FDA’s Drug Review Process: Ensuring Drugs Are Safe and Effective:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-the-fdas-drug-review-process-ensuring-drugs-are-safe-and-effective/
======================================
[12] – 4/24/2013 – Burzynski: Stable Disease:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-stable-disease/
======================================
[13] – 4/24/2013 – Burzynski: Costs of Cancer treatments:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-costs-of-cancer-treatments/
======================================
[14] – 4/27/2013 – Bob Blaskiewicz (Blatherskitewicz), Faux Skeptic Exposed!:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/bob-blaskiewicz-blatherskitewicz-faux-skeptic-exposed/
======================================
[15] – 4/19/2013 (4/27/2013-4/28/2013) Critiquing “The Skeptic” Burzynski Critics: A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics (page 1):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/27/critiquing-the-skeptic-burzynski-critics-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics-page-1/
======================================
[16] – 4/30/2013 – Critiquing “The Skeptic” Burzynski Critics: A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics (page 6):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/30/critiquing-the-skeptic-burzynski-critics-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics-page-6/
======================================
[17] – 5/6/2013 – Critiquing: Is Eric Merola issuing bogus DMCA takedown notices against critics of Stanislaw Burzynski?:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/critiquing-is-eric-merola-issuing-bogus-dmca-takedown-notices-against-critics-of-stanislaw-burzynski/
======================================
[18] – 5/29/2013 (6/2) – Critiquing the #SkepticCanary: “The Skeptics™” (SkeptiCowards©) Bob Blatherskitewicz and the so-called, “self-proclaimed” “CANCER RESEARCHER”:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/critiquing-the-skepticcanary-the-skeptics-skepticowards-bob-blatherskitewicz-and-the-so-called-self-proclaimed-cancer-researcher/
======================================
[19] – 6/6/2013 – Bob Blaskiewicz (Blatherskitewicz), Faux Skeptic Exposed!:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/bob-blaskiewicz-blatherskitewicz-faux-skeptic-exposed/
======================================
[20] – 6/8/2013 – (19. March 29, 1996) – MISDIRECTION: Critiquing “Antineoplastons: Has the FDA kept it’s promise to the American people?”:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/08/what-is-misdirection-critiquing-antineoplastons-has-the-fda-kept-its-promise-to-the-american-people/
======================================
[21] – 6/23/2013 – QUESTIONS the Critics and Cynics, “The Skeptics™” do NOT want to ANSWER:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/23/questions-the-critics-and-cynics-the-skeptics-do-not-want-to-answer/
======================================
[ 22] – 7/2/2013 –
Burzynski: Institutional Review Board (IRB):

——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/02/burzynski-institutional-review-board-irb/
======================================
[23] – 7/31/2013 – Perfessor Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz Blatherskitewicz:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/the-burzynski-b-s-app/
======================================
[24] – 8/18/2013 – The Burzynski Skeptics:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/the-burzynski-skeptics/
======================================
[25] – 8/25/2013 – Critiquing https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/critiquing-httpstheotherburzynskipatientgroup-wordpress-com/
======================================
[26] – 8/26/2013 – Yes! Weekly: Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business Part II:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/yes-weekly-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii/
======================================
“Orphan Drug”
phenylbutyrate
PB
“Orphan Drug”
phenylacetate
PN
Orphan Drug”
phenylacetylglutamine
“Orphan Drug”
phenylacetylisoglutimine
PG
“Orphan Drug”
phenylacetylisoglutiminate
PG
2011 – Orphan Drugs in Development
http://www.phrma.org/sites/default/files/pdf/rarediseases2011.pdf

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2005/020645s000_ClinPharmR.pdf

http://www.hrsa.gov/opa/programrequirements/orphandrugexclusion/orphandruglist.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2764862/
Phenylbutyrate is a aromatic fatty acid, able to induce hyperacetylation of histones H3 and H4 and growth arrest, differentiation and apoptosis of AML cell lines and primary leukemic cells. It has been effectively used to induce fetal erythropoiesis in patients with sickle cell anemia and β-thalassemia [105]. The aromatic ring does not contribute to the antitumor activity, as butyric acid is of equal or greater potency at producing these biological changes, while shortening of the fatty acid carbon chain length, as demonstrated with phenylacetate, significantly diminished drug potency [106]. After administration phenylbutyrate is metabolized to phenylacetate, then to phenylacetylglutamine and eliminated by urine [107]. The maximum tolerated doses, when administered as a 7-day continuous infusion, was 375 mg/kg/day, while higher doses were associated with encephalopathy apparently attributable to accumulation of the metabolite phenylacetate. At the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), median steady state concentration of phenylbutyrate is 0.3 mM, which is less than the ED50 of 1-2 mM required for differentiation and cytostasis in vitro but in within the concentration range in which phenylbutyrate
induces acetylation of histones. Dose-limiting toxicities were mainly represented by neurocortical toxicity, including lethargy, confusion, and slurred speech, which completely disappeared within 24 to 48 h upon cessation of the infusion. Non dose-limiting toxicities were hyperammoniemia, hyperuricemia, hypocalcemia, skin abnormalities and interstitial pneumonia [108, 109].
Bobby Blaskiewicz Bows Up ‘Bout Burzynski;
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/24/bobby-blaskiewicz-bows-up-bout-burzynski/

Posted in Bob Blaskiewicz (Robert J. Blaskiewicz @rjblaskiewicz), Debate ?, Uncategorized | Tagged "2 hours 8 minutes and 51 seconds The Lancet Oncology Peer Review Team D-12-01519: #FAIL", "2-stage phase II clinical trial design proposed by Fleming", "25. ↵ Burzynski SR Treatments for astrocytic tumors in children: current and emerging strategies Paediatr Drugs. 2006;8:167-178", "5.723 Impact Factor", "A Letter to the PBS Ombudsman about CPT12′s Airing of Burzynski”, "A10 (A10I)", "accelerated approval", "adolescent name-calling", "Amelia Saunders", "ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA", "anaplastic HBSG", "antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1", "antineoplastons A10 (Atengenal) and AS2-1 (Astugenal)", "antitumor activity", "ARM 1", "ARM 2", "AS2-1 injections", "astrocytoma grade 2", "Avastin (Bevacizumab)", "BRAIN STEM (tumor) GLIOMA", "Brian Thompson", "bud", "Burzynski 2", "Burzynski Birthday Fundraiser", "Burzynski Clinical Trials (The SEC filings)", "Burzynski critic", "Burzynski I", "Burzynski Infomercial on Colorado PBS 12", "Burzynski Movie II", "Burzynski Movie", "Burzynski referenced by other Cancer researchers", "Burzynski updates Scientific Publications page", "Burzynski: Costs of Cancer treatments", "Burzynski: Institutional Review Board (IRB)", "Burzynski: Oh, "Burzynski: Stable Disease", "Burzynski: The FDA’s Drug Review Process: Ensuring Drugs Are Safe and Effective", "Burzynski: Why has the FDA NOT granted Accelerated Approval for Antineoplastons A10 (Atengenal) and AS2-1 (Astugenal) ?", "butyric acid", "Cancer Clinical Trials", "cancer is indeed serious business", "cancer science” http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/, "chief bad guy", "Children’s Hospital Boston, "Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, "Children’s National Medical Center, "Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, "Colorado Public Television (CPT12)", "Complete Response (CR)", "conspiracy theories", "Critiquing Bob Blaskiewicz (#Burzynski Cancer is Serious Business, "Critiquing Dr David H. "Orac" Gorski, "Critiquing https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com", "Critiquing the Critics on Orac’s Respectful Insolence blog: Part II", "Critiquing The Skeptic Burzynski Critics: A Film Producer, "Critiquing: In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski “cancer cure” is reviewed…with Insolence:", "Critiquing: Is Eric Merola issuing bogus DMCA takedown notices against critics of Stanislaw Burzynski?", "Cult of MISINFORMATION”, "Cumulative List of all Products that have received Orphan Designation: Total active designations: 2002 Effective: 5/5/2009", "David H. Gorski" https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/orac-and-the-cult-of-misinformation-part-iii, "David H. Orac Gorski, "Department of General Internal Medicine, "Didymos Thomas", "diffuse BRAINSTEM GLIOMA", "Division of Endocrinology, "Division of Internal Medicine, "Doctor David Gorski", "DOI 10.1007/s00520-013-1734-6", "doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noq202", "Dose-limiting toxicities", "Dr. Burzynski", "Dr. Elloise Garside", "Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski", "Drugs R D. 2003;4(2):91-101", "Drugs R D. 2004;5(6):315-26", "Eau Claire", "Expedited Approval", "expedited review", "Fact-Checked", "Fact-checking http://thehoustoncancerquack.com", "fact-checking”, "FACTS Burzynski critics do NOT like", "fatty acid", "Faux Skeptic", "federal funds", "Federal Grants", "final clinical trial results", "gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging", "gene-targeted therapy", "Glioblastoma multiforme: a report of long-term progression-free survival and overall survival of 8 to 16 years after antineoplaston therapy and review", "grade 4 toxicity (reversible anemia)", "Hannah Bradley", "Houston Cancer Quack", "human clinical trial data", "incurable recurrent and progressive multicentric glioma", "individuals with primary or recurrent malignant glioma", "inoperable tumor of high-grade pathology (HBSG)", "Integr Cancer Ther. 2005 Jun;4(2):168-77", "Integr Cancer Ther. 2006 Mar;5(1):40-7", "interstitial pneumonia", "intravenous ANP therapy", "James Randi Educational Foundation", "James Randi Educational Funding", "Jesse Ventura", "JosephineJones", "Journal Biometrics. 1982 Mar;38(1):143-51", "Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry October 2010, "Learning is cool", "Let’s make Houston cancer quack Burzynski pay!", "Long-term survival of high-risk pediatric patients with primitive neuroectodermal tumors treated with antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1", "low-dose chemo", "LOW-GRADE ASTROCYTOMA", "M.D. Anderson Cancer Center", "man-crush", "Mark Burger", "Maximum Survival", "maximum tolerated dose (MTD)", "maximum tolerated doses", "Mayo Clinic", "Median duration of response", "Median Overall Survival from Diagnosis (OSD)", "Median Overall Survival from start of Treatment (OST)", "Median Progression-Free Survival (PFS)", "Median Survival (MST)", "Median Time to Death", "Median time to Disease Progression", "mild and moderate toxicities", "MISDIRECTION: Critiquing Antineoplastons: Has the FDA kept it’s promise to the American people?”, "Mr. Merola", "Multicenter phase II trial", "multiinstitutional study (SJHG-98)", "My 1st-hand Review of Orac’s 2nd-Hand Review – Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, "My Critique of Bob Blaskiewicz (Colorado Public Television – PBS CPT12)", "National Institutes of Health (NIH)", "Neuro Oncol (2011) 13 (3): 298-306", "neurocortical toxicity", "Non dose-limiting toxicities", "One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials", "ongoing”, "oral ANP", "orphan drug designation", "Orphan Drugs in Development", "Overall Survival (OS)", "overview for DidymusJudasThomas (reddit.com)", "Part II", "Partial Response (PR)", "PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler", "Pediatric Drugs May 2006, "Perfessor Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz Blatherskitewicz", "phase 2 clinical trial Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) re patients 8 – 16 years after diagnosis, "PHASE II (2) CLINICAL TRIAL", "Phase II study of antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 in children with recurrent and progressive multicentric glioma ", "Phase II study of antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 in patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma", "Phase II trial of tipifarnib and radiation in children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas", "Phenylbutyrate is a aromatic fatty acid", "pilocytic astrocytoma", "Professor Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz of University of Wisconsin, "profoundly dishonest", "Progression-Free Survival", "PZ Myers", "QUESTIONS the Critics and Cynics, "radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin", "randomized controlled trials", "recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma", "recurrent disease or high risk", "reddiot davidreiss666 whined like a little bitch", "reddit act like wiki’s little bitch", "reversible tinnitus", "Robert Blaskiewicz", "Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz", "Robert J. Bob Blaskiewicz" http://thehoustoncancerquack.com, "rotten little troll", "scary music", "scary voices", "Schenck v. United States, "scientific peer-reviewed journals", "Scooby Doo, "Seattle Children’s Hospital, "self-proclaimed" "CANCER RESEARCHER", "serious toxicity", "Single Patient Protocols (SPP)", "Skeptic Canary Show – BlogTalkRadio", "skin abnormalities", "skin allergy", "slurred speech", "social media", "SODIUM PHENYLBUTYRATE", "Special Exception (SE)", "St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital", "St. Jude", "Stable disease is a valid end point in clinical trials", "standard radiation therapy in combination with chemotherapy (RAT) (Mandell et al.) (6/1992–10/1997) children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM TUMORS: results of pediatric oncology , "standard radiation therapy", "Stanislaw Burzynski: Personalized gene-targeted cancer therapy for dummies", "Study AVF3708g", "subject-matter", "Support Care Cancer. 2013 Feb 13. [Epub ahead of print] (Supportive Care in Cancer)", "surgical oncologist", "Targeted therapy with antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 of high-grade, "tax deductible as allowed by law", "The Burzynski Skeptics", "The Burzynski Skeptics" https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/the-burzynski-skeptics/, "The Cult of “Misinformation”, "The Lancet Oncology Peer Review Team D-12-01519", "The Lancet Oncology. We have now had time to consider your manuscript and unfortunately, "The Skeptics (Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, "The Skeptics™ Robert J. (don’t call me Bobby) Blaskiewicz wants to Debate", "There is no role for hyperfractionated radiotherapy in the management of children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic brainstem tumors: results of a Pediatric Oncology Group phase III trial compar, "U.S. Tax Return", "United States Food and Drug Administration Commissioner David Kessler"? Oncologist, "United States Food and Drug Administration", "university chancellor", "University of California—San Francisco", "University of Wisconsin", "unknown status”, "Virtual Skeptics", "visual pathway glioma", "we’re coming for you, "Yes! Weekly: Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business Part II", #CPT12, #FAIL, #sciencebasedmedicine, (PG), 249 U.S. 47 (1919)", @AceofSpadesHQ, @bbc5live, @BurzynskiMovie, @DianthusMed, @drpaulmorgan, @FauxSkeptic, @frozenwarning, @gorskon, @Majikthyse, @mikespillane, @oracknows, @PDJudasT, @rjblaskiewicz, @robertquickert, @ScienceBasedMed, @TomLemley1, @_JosephineJones, A Cancer Doctor, Adam Jacobs, adverse effects, agranulocytosis, anaemia, and progressive brainstem glioma", And Their Critics (page 1)", And Their Critics (page 6)", ANONYMOUS, ANP, antineoplaston, antineoplastons, AS2-1, Avastin, “18:25 of Virtual Skeptics episode 13″, “Additional Safeguards for Children in Clinical Investigations", “bilk people out of buckets of money”, “birthday surprise”, “Bob Baskiewicz", “Burzynski II Fails to Convince Swift” http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/2050-qburzynski-iiq-is-more-of-the-same.html, “conflict of interest", “CPT President Willard Rowland", “Crime does pay”, “Fact-checking Burzynski II”, “Fact-Finding", “Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)", “high sodium", “his quackery”, “his snake oil”, “Impact Factors”, “Insert Foot in Mouth”, “interesting and civil discussions", “IRB Institutional Review Board", “Marc Stephens", “Mr Willard Rowland", “Mr. Getler”, “my little Polish sausage”, “non-toxic”, “Off label”, “pediatric patients", “Phase 3 studies begin if EVIDENCE of EFFECTIVENESS is shown in Phase 2″, “Professor @rjblaskiewicz", “Professor of Writing”, “Rebecca Stevens", “reliable source”, “scheming skeptics?”, “Second-Hand review of Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, “Shari Bernson", “sheer stubborn stupid", “skeptical teleconference”, “skeptics are hiding behind their BS free speech", “Skeptics for the Protection of Cancer Patients", “snake oil”, “SOP-2012 v2-draft doc", “Standard Operating Procedures”, “The Burzynski clinic is a place you go to die”, “The lies”, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting ‘fire’ in a theater and causing a panic", “The OTHER Burzynski Patient Group”, “The results of clinical trials are OFTEN published in peer-reviewed scientific journals”, “The Skeptics™” do NOT want to ANSWER:", “there is a plan to remind him of the grief he has caused”, “This fraud”, “tons of chemo”, “withdrawn”, “[T]he emphasis in Phase 2 is on EFFECTIVENESS”, ”1997, ”whether or NOT the results are published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal", Blatherskitewicz, Bob Blaskiewicz, Bob Blaskiewicz (Blatherskitewicz), BRAINSTEM GLIOMA, BT-11, Burzynski, Burzynski Clinic, Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Cancer, censors, charlatan, CHEMOTHERAPY, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, China, citation, clinicaltrials, Colorado Public Television - PBS, Complete Response, confusion, conman, Conspiracy Theory, controversial, Critiquing the #SkepticCanary: "The Skeptics™" (SkeptiCowards©) Bob Blatherskitewicz and the so-called, David Gorski, David H. Gorski, davidreiss666, DC", deceive, Declaration of Helsinki, demonization, dishonest, disinform, disinformation, disingenuous, documentary, Dvorit D. Samid, Egypt, encephalopathy, Eric Merola, FACS", Faux Skeptic Exposed!", FDA, fever, FOIA, fools, Forbes, Free Speech, Genes, GLIOBLASTOMA, Guy Chapman, hashtag, Havanna Nights”, his medical practice was expanded to include traditional cancer treatment options such as chemotherapy, Houston, HoustonCancerQuack, http//www.sciencebasedmedicine.org, http://anp4all.com, http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-16/politics/health.care.hearing_1_health-insurance-post-claims-underwriting-individual-health?_s=PM:POLITICS, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-05-14/national/35457286_1_lung-cancer-drug-drugs-work-multiple-myeloma-patients, http://bit.ly/15lv5zG, http://blog.rbutr.com/, http://burzynskimovie.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=75&Itemid=55, http://cancer.disease.com/Treatment/Radiation-Therapy, http://cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/search/results?protocolsearchid=11475951, http://cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/search/results?protocolsearchid=11476036, http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/11/19/6767.full, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=burzynski&pg=1, http://cohen.house.gov/press-release/cohen-st-jude-receive-43-million-childhood-cancer-survivor-study, http://dianthus.co.uk/burzynski-qa, http://goo.gl/7pWIj, http://lanyrd.com/2013/tam/sckkdy/, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007s00520-013-1734-6, http://link.springer.com/article/10.216500148581-200608030-00003, http://m.cancer.gov/topics/factsheets/clinical-trials, http://m.theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/9/2/197.long, http://necss.org/speakers/bob-blaskiewicz/, http://neuro-oncology.oxfordjournals.org/content/13/3/298.full, http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120934207044648511.html?mod=2_1566_topbox#articleTabsarticle, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/abstract;jsessionid=6717837591CCC8FCBD8E46163808E221.d03t01, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/full, http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BT6kM-zCcAAHsnV.png, http://rbutr.com/, http://rhysmorgan.co/blog, http://rhysmorgan.co/burzynski-morally-reprehensible, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/02/stanislaw-burzynski-fails-to-save-another-patient/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/12/13/stanislaw-burzynski-personalized-gene-targeted-cancer-therapy-for-dummies/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/03/14/five-things-i-learned-second-hand-from-the-recent-screening-of-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-2/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/08/eric-merola-and-stanislaw-burzynskis-secret-weapon-against-the-skeptics-fabio-lanzoni-part-2/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/04/stanislaw-burzynski-versus-the-bbc/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/07/i-want-my-anp/, http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/01/06/lets-make-houston-cancer-quack-burzynski-pay/, http://skepticalhumanities.com/2013/03/26/a-letter-to-the-pbs-ombudsman-about-cpt12s-airing-burzynski, http://skepticalhumanities.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/burzynskiform483feb2013.pdf, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/17/critiquing-the-critics-on-oracs-respectful-insolence-blog-part-ii/, http://t.co/F79zndTjuZ, http://t.co/RxDZHDN2RM, http://t.co/t9WMpNRN9L, http://t.co/wxU2PHJ3GD, http://thehoustoncancerquack.com/, http://thehoustoncancerquack.com/2013/01/04/happy-birthday-dr-burzynski, http://thehoustoncancerquack.com/fact-checking-burzynski-ii, http://thewelshboyo.wordpress.com, http://virtualskeptics.com/, http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2005/020645s000_ClinPharmR.pdf, http://www.anp4all.com, http://www.ascopost.com/issues/march-15-2012/rising-costs-in-radiation-oncology-linked-to-medicare-coverage.aspx, http://www.avalerehealth.net/news/2012-04-03_COA/Cost_of_Care.pdf, http://www.blogtalkradio.com…/ep09–talking-burzynski–david-gorski-and-bob-blaskiewicz http://www.blogtalkradio.com/skepticcanary/2013/05/29/ep09–talking-burzynski–david-gorski-and-bob-blaski, http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/druginfo/fda-bevacizumab, http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/antineoplastons/healthprofessional/page6, http://www.centerforinquiry.net/speakers/blaskiewicz_bob, http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/blahg/2013/03/burzynski-another-fact-blind-troll-who-predicted-that/#comments, http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/09/24/3549634/prices-soar-as-hospitals-dominate.html, http://www.csicop.org/author/rblaskiewicz, http://www.drugs.com/newdrugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-avastin-brain-cancer-glioblastoma-has-progressed-following-prior-1342.html, http://www.drugs.com/newdrugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-avastin-combination-paclitaxel-chemotherapy-first-line-advanced-852.html, http://www.drugs.com/pro/temodar.html, http://www.fda.gov/downloads/forindustry/developingproductsforrarediseasesconditions/howtoapplyfororphanproductdesignation/ucm162066.X, http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml, http://www.hrsa.gov/opa/programrequirements/orphandrugexclusion/orphandruglist.pdf, http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2530297?uid=3739256&uid=2460338175&uid=2460337855&uid=2&uid=4&uid=83&uid=63&sid=21102589296903, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12718563, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15563234, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15911929, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16484713, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/23404230, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/7082756/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2764862/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10561351/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11475493/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15047924/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15565574, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19826356/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23404230, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7082756/, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000394.htm, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/health/06avastin.html?_r=0, http://www.phrma.org/sites/default/files/pdf/rarediseases2011.pdf, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/burzynski-cancer-is-a-serious-business-part-2-like-the-first-burzynski-movie-only-more-so/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/david-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/stanislaw-burzynski-propaganda-versus-news, http://www.scienceblogs.com/Insolence, http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/724445/000091205702038660/a2091272z10qsb.txt, http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/724445/000110465912047927/a12-16018_1ex10d10.htm, http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=1442, http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=1798, http://www.skeptical.gb.net/blog/?p=2401, http://www.skepticalhumanities.com, http://www.stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/, http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=403c6f9523e70110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD, http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=6f8afa3186e70110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD&vgnextchannel=2f62940504f9a210VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD, http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=b7e79bb8a0cf5110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD&cpsextcurrchannel=1, http://www.temodar.com/temodar/index.do, http://www.thetwentyfirstfloor.com/?p=8001, http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2013/01/13370/how-prostate-cancer-therapies-compare-cost-and-effectiveness, http://www.uwec.edu/Staff/blaskir/, http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3, http://www.yesweekly.com/triad/article-16162-burzynski-cancer-is-.html, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK-yF8w6nLo, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/colorado-public-television-pbs/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/keir-liddle-and-the-cult-of-misinformation, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/david-h-gorski-and-the-cult-of-misinformation, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/the-cult-of-misinformation, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/burzynski-updates-scientific-publications-page/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/facts-burzynski-critics-do-not-like/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/the-cult-of-misinformation-continued, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/josephine-jones-and-the-cult-of-misinformation, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/my-1st-hand-review-of-oracs-2nd-hand-review-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/stanislaw-rajmund-burzynski-m-d-ph-d-and-freedom-of-speech/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/the-skeptics/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/critiquing-bob-blaskiewicz-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/my-critique-of-bob-blaskiewicz-colorado-public-television-pbs-cpt12/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/burzynski-clinical-trials-2, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/david-h-gorskis-conspiracy-mongering-and-more-of-his-dr-stanislaw-burzynski-stories, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/fact-checking-httpthehoustoncancerquack-com/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/burzynski-referenced-by-other-cancer-researchers/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-costs-of-cancer-treatments/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-stable-disease/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/burzynski-the-fdas-drug-review-process-ensuring-drugs-are-safe-and-effective/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/27/critiquing-the-skeptic-burzynski-critics-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics-page-1/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/30/critiquing-the-skeptic-burzynski-critics-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics-page-6/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/critiquing-is-eric-merola-issuing-bogus-dmca-takedown-notices-against-critics-of-stanislaw-burzynski/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/critiquing-the-skepticcanary-the-skeptics-skepticowards-bob-blatherskitewicz-and-the-so-called-self-proclaimed-cancer-researcher/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/bob-blaskiewicz-blatherskitewicz-faux-skeptic-exposed/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/08/what-is-misdirection-critiquing-antineoplastons-has-the-fda-kept-its-promise-to-the-american-people/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/23/questions-the-critics-and-cynics-the-skeptics-do-not-want-to-answer/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/02/burzynski-institutional-review-board-irb/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/critiquing-in-which-the-latest-movie-about-stanislaw-burzynski-cancer-cure-is-reviewed-with-insolence-2/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/the-lancet-oncology-peer-review-team-d-12-01519-fail/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/the-lancet-oncology-peer-review-team-d-12-01519-fail-2/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/burzynski-why-has-the-fda-not-granted-accelerated-approval-for-antineoplastons-a10-astengenal-and-as2-1-astugenal/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/the-burzynski-b-s-app/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/critiquing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-l-i-a-r/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/the-burzynski-skeptics/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/21/critiquing-david-h-gorski-md-phd-facs-www-sciencebasedmedicine-orgeditorial-staffdavid-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/24/critiquing-httpstheotherburzynskipatientgroup-wordpress-com/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/yes-weekly-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-ii/, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/27/wayne-state-university-detroit-michigan-quickly-realized-that-david-h-gorski-md-phd-facs-is-not-doing-something-wrong-when-he-lies-about-burz, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/21/critiquing-the-institute-of-medicine-report-on-cancer-care-is-the-system-in-crisis/, https://twitter.com/Ac2cSheila/status/186164592676843520, https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312256370936266752, https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312264347277737984, https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312270472341487616, https://twitter.com/BurzynskiMovie/status/312425208462049280, https://twitter.com/frozenwarning/status/312141313451634688, https://twitter.com/gorskon/status/312601559647281154, https://twitter.com/jref/status/312255856928509953, https://twitter.com/RatbagsDotCom/status/304050113834262528, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310589187797700608, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310856694525730817, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310923414175105024, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/310979838372626432, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311091486349475840, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311317995861442560, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311524673819144192, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311543395556409344, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311594720373645312, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311681213934997505, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311854061550960642, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311859126965788672, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/311931318629986305, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312013682408292354, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312052091407433728, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/31212153099585536, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312234423288487936, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/312998393259622402, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313465677614817280, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313496736708583424, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313508346399428608, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313725494170361856, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/313741293576667137, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/314115938960154624, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/315972148684529664, https://twitter.com/rjblaskiewicz/status/362599624596393984, https://twitter.com/TheSkeptiCritic/status/324329482712391680, https://twitter.com/_JosephineJones/status/377919961659764736, https://www.facebook.com/questions/488444654552853, hyperammoniemia, hypernatraemuia, Hypernatremia, hyperuricemia, hypocalcemia, hypoglycaemia, 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 Anti, in 2 hours 8 minutes and 51 seconds", infallibility, infamy, Internet, IRB, isoPG, Issue 1, Issue 3, Japan, Josephine Jones, jref, Keir Liddle, L.I.A.R.", lethargy, lie, link, M.D.", Massachusetts", MD", Memphis, metabolite, metabolized, misdirect, misdirection, misinform, misinformation, misinformation” https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/the-skeptics, misrepresent, myalgia, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Cancer Institute (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), NCI, NCI 06-C-0064E, numbness, Objective Response, Ohio", on this occasion, oncologist, pal, Part II (2)", Partial Response, PB, Pennsylvania", Peter A. Lipson, Ph.D, Ph.D and Freedom of Speech”, Phase 2, phase III clinical trials, PhD, PHENYLACETATE, PHENYLACETYLGLUTAMINE, phenylacetylisoglutiminate, phenylacetylisoglutimine, PHENYLBUTYRATE, pic.twitter.com/8n3fQkX0v0, PN, Poland, pp 135-140", pp 167-178", Professor", Progressive Disease, protocol, PubMed, Put up or shut up, quack, r-but-r, R.J. Blaskiewicz, rats, rbutr, recurrent, reference, results", RT, Russia, Seattle, shills, Skeptical Humanities, South Korea, spambot, spammers, stable Disease, Stanislaw Burzynski, Stanislaw Rajmund Burzynski, stupid, Taiwan (ROC), Tax-Exempt, Temodal, Temodar, Tennessee", THELANCETONCOLOGY-D-12-01519, theotherburzynskipatientgroup, TheSkeptiCritic, tiredness, toxic, trial.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results, trolls, tumor, Twitter, TX, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), United States Supreme Court, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center", urine, USA, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, VAMPIRE, Volume 286, Volume 8, vomiting, WASHINGTON, we have decided not to publish it because we believe the message would be better elsewhere", Where are You?", Wikipedia, you little bitch", you little polish sausage you.” | Leave a reply

Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski wins “Noballs” Prize

Posted on September 13, 2013 by didymusjudasthomas
Reply

Dr. David H. Gorski, M.D., Ph.D., FACS a/k/a “Orac”, I’m calling you out

And I’m calling out the institutions with which you have a professional relationship
======================================
Wayne State University
——————————————————————
http://www.wsusurgery.com/facultyc3/david-gorski/
——————————————————————
Wayne State University School of Medicine
——————————————————————
http://www.wsusurgery.com/research-team-dr-gorski/
——————————————————————
Section of Breast Surgery / Graduate Program in Cancer Biology
——————————————————————
http://cancerbiologyprogram.med.wayne.edu/faculty/gorski.php
——————————————————————
http://prognosis.med.wayne.edu/article/dr-gorski-named-codirector-of-michigan-breast-oncology-quality-initiative
——————————————————————
Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center / Institute
——————————————————————
http://www.karmanos.org/Physicians/Details.aspx?sid=1&physician=70
——————————————————————
Alexander J. Walt Comprehensive Breast Center
——————————————————————
American College of Surgeons Committee on Cancer
——————————————————————
Institute for Science in Medicine
——————————————————————
National Geographic (#NatGeo)

ScienceBlogs . com
http://scienceblogs.com/Insolence,
——————————————————————
http://www.scienceblogs.com/Insolence
——————————————————————
ScienceBasedMedicine . org
——————————————————————
http://sciencebasedmedicine.org/
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/
——————————————————————
The Council for Biotechnology Information
——————————————————————
http://www.whybiotech.com
======================================
The Claim
======================================
[1] – 6/3/2013 – Gorski claimed:

“[I]f I had screwed up, I would have admitted it”
======================================
The LIE
======================================
[2] – 6/4/2013 – Gorski LIED:

” … Burzynski never explains which genes are targeted by antineoplastons … “
——————————————————————
[3] – 8/7/2013 – I pointed out to Gorski the majority of Burzynski’s publications which explain “which genes are targeted by antineoplastons … “, although there are even more
——————————————————————
[4] – DISCLAIMER: “Because he is still a working academic surgeon and researcher (and hopes to remain so until he retires, which means—hopefully–for another 20 years or possibly even more), Dr. Gorski must emphasize that the opinions expressed in his posts on SBM are his and his alone … “

Gorski might incorrectly assume that his DISCLAIMER is going to allow him to hide like a snake in the grass, but it’s NOT

I have yet to see his admission that he “screwed up”, even though he has claimed:
——————————————————————
[5] – “Our only goal is to promote high standards of science in medicine”
——————————————————————
[6] – 11/.2/2012 – “Personally, having pored over Burzynski’s publications … “
——————————————————————
[7] – 5/8/2013 – “I’ve searched Burzynski’s publications … “
——————————————————————
[8] – 5/31/2013 – “Burzynski has a contingent of defenders who have targeted skeptics like me for special abuse, up to and including harassing me at work by calling my university to complain about my online verbiage critical of Burzynski and implying that I am somehow doing something wrong”

“(My university quickly realized that I was not.)”
——————————————————————
[9] – 6/5/2013 – “ … I do know cancer science”
——————————————————————
[10] – 6/7/2013 – “Unlike Mr. Merola, I am indeed very concerned with getting my facts correct”
======================================
An Ethical Conundrum
======================================
To me, the message the institutions that Gorski is affiliated with are sending a message that it’s okay to LIE

and, we hire LIARS

And that’s the position I’m taking until Gorski puts on some Big Boy pants and takes accountability for his actions

Own it, Gorski
======================================
REFERENCES
======================================
[1] – 6/3/2013 – Stanislaw Burzynski: A deceptive propaganda movie versus an upcoming news report
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/stanislaw-burzynski-propaganda-versus-news
——————————————————————
[1] – 6/3/2013 – In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski’s “cancer cure” is reviewed…with Insolence
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/03/in-which-the-latest-movie-about-stanislaw-burzynskis-cancer-cure-is-reviewed-with-insolence/
======================================
[2] – 6/4/2013 – Stanislaw Burzynski versus the BBC
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/04/stanislaw-burzynski-versus-the-bbc/
======================================
[3] – 8/7/2013 – Critiquing: Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski, M.D., Ph.D, L.I.A.R.:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/critiquing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-l-i-a-r/
======================================
[4] – DISCLAIMER
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/david-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/
======================================
[5] – Science Based Medicine . org Editorial Staff
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/
======================================
[6] – 11/.2/2012
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/02/stanislaw-burzynski-fails-to-save-another-patient/
======================================
[7] – 5/8/2013
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/08/eric-merola-and-stanislaw-burzynskis-secret-weapon-against-the-skeptics-fabio-lanzoni-part-2/
======================================
[8] – .5/31/2013
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/
======================================
[9] – 6/5/2013
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/
======================================
[10] – 6/7/2013
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/07/i-want-my-anp/
======================================
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/
======================================

Posted in critique, critiques, critiqued, critiquing, Gorski ScienceBlogs.com/Insolence ScienceBasedMedicine, The Skeptics | Tagged "accountability forhis actions", "Alexander J. Walt Comprehensive Breast Center", "American College of Surgeons Committee on Cancer", "An Ethical Conundrum", "Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center / Institute", "Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute", "Big Boy pants", "Burzynski has a contingent of defenders who have targeted skeptics like me for special abuse up to and including harassing me at work by calling my university to complain about my online verbiage cri, "Burzynski never explains which genes are targeted by antineoplastons", "Critiquing: Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski M.D. Ph.D L.I.A.R.", "DISCLAIMER: Because he is still a working academic surgeon and researcher (and hopes to remain so until he retires, "Dr. David H. "Orac" Gorski wins Noballs Prize", "Dr. David H. Gorski M.D. Ph.D. FACS", "Graduate Program in Cancer Biology", "hide like a snake in the grass", "if I had screwed up, "In which the latest movie about Stanislaw Burzynski’s “cancer cure” is reviewed…with Insolence", "Institute for Science in Medicine", "My university quickly realized that I was not", "National Geographic", "Science Based Medicine . org Editorial Staff", "ScienceBasedMedicine . org" http://sciencebasedmedicine.org/, "ScienceBlogs . com", "Section of Breast Surgery", "Stanislaw Burzynski versus the BBC", "Stanislaw Burzynski: A deceptive propaganda movie versus an upcoming news report", "The Council for Biotechnology Information", "University of Michigan", "Unlike Mr. Merola, "Wayne State University Detroit Michigan quickly realized that David H. Gorski, "Wayne State University School of Medicine", "Wayne State University", #sciencebasedmedicine, @gorskon, @oracknows, @ScienceBasedMed, “I do know cancer science”, “I’ve searched Burzynski’s publications", “Our only goal is to promote high standards of science in medicine”, “Personally, having pored over Burzynski’s publications", http//www.sciencebasedmedicine.org, http://cancerbiologyprogram.med.wayne.edu/faculty/gorski.php, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gorski, http://prognosis.med.wayne.edu/article/dr-gorski-named-codirector-of-michigan-breast-oncology-quality-initiative, http://scienceblogs.com/Insolence, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/02/stanislaw-burzynski-fails-to-save-another-patient/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/08/eric-merola-and-stanislaw-burzynskis-secret-weapon-against-the-skeptics-fabio-lanzoni-part-2/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/03/in-which-the-latest-movie-about-stanislaw-burzynskis-cancer-cure-is-reviewed-with-insolence/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/04/stanislaw-burzynski-versus-the-bbc/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/07/i-want-my-anp/, http://www.karmanos.org/Physicians/Details.aspx?sid=1&physician=70, http://www.ncas.org/2013/02/mar-9-david-h-gorski-quackademic.html?m=1, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/david-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/stanislaw-burzynski-propaganda-versus-news, http://www.scienceblogs.com/Insolence, http://www.wsusurgery.com/facultyc3/david-gorski/, http://www.wsusurgery.com/research-team-dr-gorski/, https://mobile.twitter.com/gorskon, https://mobile.twitter.com/oracknows, https://mobile.twitter.com/ScienceBasedMed, https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/critiquing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-m-d-ph-d-l-i-a-r/, I am indeed very concerned with getting my facts correct”, I would have admitted it", liars, lie, lied, MD PhD FACS is NOT doing something wrong when he LIES about Burzynski:", NatGeo, Orac, Oracolyte, Oracolytes, which means—hopefully–for another 20 years or possibly even more) Dr. Gorski must emphasize that the opinions expressed in his posts on SBM are his and his alone", www.whybiotech.com | Leave a reply

Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, quickly realized that David H. Gorski, MD, PhD, FACS is NOT doing something wrong when he LIES about Burzynski

Posted on August 27, 2013 by didymusjudasthomas
Reply

March 14, 2013 David Gorski posted on ScienceBasedMedicine . org [1] and ScienceBlogs . com/Insolence [2]

3.

“Merola bemoans how unfair it is (to him) that the FDA is requiring a phase III clinical trials for Burzynski’s antineoplastons and refusing to grant accelerated approval for them, as it did for Temodar and Avastin”

“It seems like a compelling point on the surface if you don’t know about the drug approval process or Burzynski; indeed, The Skeptics who viewed the movie wondered about this claim”

“Here’s what, as far as I can tell from my reports, Merola leaves out”

“Temodar and Avastin both had proper, completed, and published phase II trials before approval”

Does Gorski provide a reference to support his statement ?

“Temodar and Avastin both had proper, completed, and published phase II trials before approval”

NO !

Does he provide a citation ?

NO !!

Does he provide a link ?

NO !!!

Why not ?

Is it because Science Based Medicine . org proclaims:

“Our only goal is to promote high standards of science in medicine” ? [3]

Is it because “Orac” is god ??

Is it because Gorski has proclaimed:

6/5/2013 “ … I do know cancer science”??? [4]

Is it because “Orac” says:

6/7/2013 “Unlike Mr. Merola, I am indeed very concerned with getting my facts correct” ???? [5]

1/1999 Temodar (Temozolomide): received accelerated approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treatment of anaplastic astrocytoma (brain cancer) patients [6]

Was the United States Food and Drug Administration’s 1/1999 accelerated approval based on the PUBLISHED FINAL RESULTS OF A PHASE II (2) CLINICAL TRIAL?

The answer is: NO

1/1999 – FDA Accelerated Approval [6]

9/1999 – Phase 2 publication [7]

12/2000 – publication [8]

5/6/2009 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval of Avastin (bevacizumab) for people with glioblastoma (brain cancer) with progressive disease following prior therapy [9]

Was the United States Food and Drug Administration’s 5/6/2009 accelerated approval based on the PUBLISHED FINAL RESULTS OF A PHASE II (2) CLINICAL TRIAL?

.2/10/2009 – 1st arm Phase 2 publication [10]

5/6/2009 – FDA Accelerated Approval [9]

1/1/2010 – 2nd arm publication [11]

The answer is: The 1st arm of the phase 2 clinical trial was published .2/10/2009, before the 5/6/2009 FDA approval, and the 2nd arm was published 1/1/2010, after the FDA approval

So, Gorski has been caught in yet another LIE

But no worries !

5/31/2013 Orac posted:

“Burzynski has a contingent of defenders who have targeted skeptics like me for special abuse, up to and including harassing me at work by calling my university to complain about my online verbiage critical of Burzynski and implying that I am somehow doing something wrong”

“(My university quickly realized that I was not.)” [12]

Gorski obviously has carte blanche to LIE

I wonder what

Wayne State University

Wayne State University School of Medicine

Section of Breast Surgery / Graduate Program in Cancer Biology

Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center / Institute

Alexander J. Walt Comprehensive Breast Center

American College of Surgeons Committee on Cancer

Institute for Science in Medicine

National Geographic

ScienceBlogs . com

and

ScienceBasedMedicine . org

all think of this, knowing that they could become the next

“wretched hive of scum and hackery ?”

David H. Gorski, MD, PhD, FACS,
maybe you should check your FACTS
======================================
[1] Burzynski: Cancer Is A Serious Business, Part 2: Like the first Burzynski movie, only more so?
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/burzynski-cancer-is-a-serious-business-part-2-like-the-first-burzynski-movie-only-more-so/
======================================
[2] Five things I learned (second hand) from the recent screening of Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part 2
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/03/14/five-things-i-learned-second-hand-from-the-recent-screening-of-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-2/
======================================
[3] ScienceBasedMedicine Editorial Staff
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/
======================================
[4] Odds and Ends about Burzynski Clinic
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/
======================================
[5] I want my ANP
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/07/i-want-my-anp/
======================================
[6] 1/1999 Temodar (Temozolomide): received accelerated approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
——————————————————————
http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/11/19/6767.full
======================================
[7] 9/1999 – Multicenter phase II trial of temozolomide in patients with anaplastic astrocytoma or anaplastic oligoastrocytoma at first relapse
Temodal Brain Tumor Group
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10561351/
J Clin Oncol. 1999 Sep;17(9):2762-71.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10561351/
JCO September 1999 vol. 17 no. 9 2762
http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/17/9/2762.abstract
ERRATA: Correction for vol. 17, p. 2762 JCO Nov 1, 1999:3693
http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/17/9/2762.long
University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/17/9/2762.full.pdf
======================================
[8] 12/2000 – Temozolomide and anaplastic astrocytoma:
new indication
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11475493/
Prescrire Int. 2000 Dec;9(50):170-1.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/11475493/
======================================
[9] 5/6/2009 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval of Avastin (bevacizumab)
——————————————————————
http://www.drugs.com/newdrugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-avastin-brain-cancer-glioblastoma-has-progressed-following-prior-1342.html
Study AVF3708g
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/druginfo/fda-bevacizumab
Study NCI 06-C-0064E
======================================
[10] .2/10/2009 Phase II Trial of Single-Agent Bevacizumab Followed by Bevacizumab Plus Irinotecan at Tumor Progression in Recurrent Glioblastoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19114704/
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10;27(5):740-5. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.3055
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19114704/
Epub 2008 Dec 29
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2645088/
JCO February 10, 2009 vol. 27 no. 5 740-745
http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740
Published online before print December.29, 2008, doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.3055
http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740.long
Neuro-Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740.full

http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740.full.pdf
======================================
[11] 1/1/2010 Bevacizumab: in previously treated glioblastoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20108991/
Drugs. 2010;70(2):181-9. doi: 10.2165/11203890-000000000-00000
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/20108991/
Drugs January 2010, Volume 70, Issue 2, pp 181-189
http://link.springer.com/article/10.2165%2F11203890-000000000-00000
Adis, a Wolters Kluwer Business, Auckland, New Zealand
======================================
[12] On “helping” that is anything but
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/
======================================

Posted in critique, critiques, critiqued, critiquing, Gorski ScienceBlogs.com/Insolence ScienceBasedMedicine, research, The Skeptics | Tagged "accelerated approval", "Adis a Wolters Kluwer Business Auckland New Zealand", "Alexander J. Walt Comprehensive Breast Center", "American College of Surgeons Committee on Cancer", "Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center / Institute", "Bevacizumab: in previously treated glioblastoma", "Burzynski: Cancer Is A Serious Business", "David H. Gorski MD PhD FACS", "drug approval process", "Drugs January 2010 Volume 70 Issue 2 pp 181-189", "Drugs. 2010;70(2):181-9. doi: 10.2165/11203890-000000000-00000", "Epub 2008 Dec 29", "ERRATA: Correction for vol. 17 p. 2762 JCO Nov 1 1999:3693", "Five things I learned (second hand) from the recent screening of Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business Part 2", "I want my ANP", "Institute for Science in Medicine", "J Clin Oncol. 1999 Sep;17(9):2762-71", "J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10;27(5):740-5. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.3055", "JCO February 10 2009 vol. 27 no. 5 740-745", "JCO September 1999 vol. 17 no. 9 2762", "Multicenter phase II trial of temozolomide in patients with ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA or anaplastic oligoastrocytoma at first relapse", "National Geographic", "Neuro-Oncology Branch National Cancer Institute National Institutes of Health Bethesda MD USA", "Odds and Ends about Burzynski Clinic", "On helping that is anything but", "people with glioblastoma (brain cancer) with progressive disease", "Phase II Trial of Single-Agent Bevacizumab Followed by Bevacizumab Plus Irinotecan at Tumor Progression in Recurrent Glioblastoma", "Prescrire Int. 2000 Dec;9(50):170-1", "PUBLISHED FINAL RESULTS OF A PHASE II (2) CLINICAL TRIAL", "Published online before print December.29, "ScienceBasedMedicine . org", "ScienceBasedMedicine Editorial Staff", "ScienceBlogs . com", "ScienceBlogs . com/Insolence", "Section of Breast Surgery / Graduate Program in Cancer Biology", "Study AVF3708g", "Study NCI 06-C-0064E", "Temodal Brain Tumor Group", "Temozolomide and anaplastic astrocytoma: new indication", "U.S. Food and Drug Administration", "United States Food and Drug Administration", "University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Houston TX USA", "Wayne State University Detroit Michigan, "Wayne State University School of Medicine", "Wayne State University", 2008 doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.3055", antineoplastons, Avastin, “anaplastic astrocytoma (brain cancer) patients", “carte blanche", “wretched hive of scum and hackery ?”, Bevacizumab, F.D.A., FACTS, FDA, http://cancerbiologyprogram.med.wayne.edu/faculty/gorski.php, http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/11/19/6767.full, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gorski, http://link.springer.com/article/10.216511203890-000000000-00000, http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/17/9/2762.abstract, http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/17/9/2762.full.pdf, http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/17/9/2762.long, http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740, http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740.full, http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740.full.pdf, http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/5/740.long, http://prognosis.med.wayne.edu/article/dr-gorski-named-codirector-of-michigan-breast-oncology-quality-initiative, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/03/14/five-things-i-learned-second-hand-from-the-recent-screening-of-burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business-part-2/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/05/31/on-helping-that-is-anything-but/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/07/i-want-my-anp/, http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/druginfo/fda-bevacizumab, http://www.drugs.com/newdrugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-avastin-brain-cancer-glioblastoma-has-progressed-following-prior-1342.html, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10561351/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/11475493/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19114704/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/20108991/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2645088/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10561351/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11475493/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19114704/, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20108991/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/burzynski-cancer-is-a-serious-business-part-2-like-the-first-burzynski-movie-only-more-so/, http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/, http://www.wsusurgery.com/facultyc3/david-gorski/, http://www.wsusurgery.com/research-team-dr-gorski/, https://mobile.twitter.com/gorskon, https://mobile.twitter.com/oracknows, https://mobile.twitter.com/ScienceBasedMed, lie, Merola, Orac, Part 2: Like the first Burzynski movie only more so?", phase III clinical trials, quickly realized that David H. Gorski MD PhD FACS is NOT doing something wrong when he LIES about Burzynski", Temodar, Temozolomide, The Skeptics | Leave a reply

Search

Recent posts

  • Pete Cohen films Pat and Steve Clarkson January 15, 2014
  • Pete Cohen talks to Steve and Mary Jo Siegel January 14, 2014
  • Pete Cohen talks with Doug Olson January 10, 2014
  • Pete Cohen talks with Burzynski Patient January 8, 2014
  • Dr. Li-Chuan Chin, PhD, National Cancer Institute Scientist (1991-1997) talks about Dr. Burzynski and Antineoplastons January 6, 2014

Archives

Categories

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com
Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar