Critiquing https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com

Critiquing https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com

Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz operates The Other Burzynski Patient Group (TOBPG)

The problem is:

1. Bob Blaskiewicz Faux Skeptic Exposed! does NOT want to debate or want people to consider the failures of Science Based Medicine compared to Burzynski, because he has an agenda

2. @rjblaskiewicz is a known LIAR

Making unsubstantiated claims like this:

Bob Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz) tweeted at 9:45am – 25 Aug 13:

@dixon_frederick @AlaaTheWarrior Actually, he CLAIMS a success rate, but is unable to publish. Suspicious: clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?te…

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
374 – TOTAL CHILDREN DIED:
Science Based Medicine

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[6] .9/15/1999 – 29 / 85% died
======================================
[9] .9/15/1994 – 51 / 88% – children died
======================================
[8] 1/1998 – 8 / 89% of 9 children died of their disease at median of 44 weeks
======================================
[5] .10/21/2002 – 12 / 100% – all children patients died
======================================
[2] 5/1/2010 – 18 – children patients have died from disease progression
======================================
[3] 2/2008 – All 30 / 100% – children have died
======================================
[4] 1/1/2005 – 33 / 100% – children died of disease progression
======================================
[1] 4/2011 – 63 / 100% – children died
======================================
[7] .3/15/1999 – 130 / 100% – children died
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
COMBINED:
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[1] 4/2011 – children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG)
——————————————————————
[1] 4/2011 – children with DIPG
——————————————————————
[1] 5/1/2010 children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma
——————————————————————
[1] 5/1/2010 children with diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPGs)
——————————————————————
[1] 5/1/2010 Pediatric patients with newly diagnosed DIPGs
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – children with diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – newly diagnosed diffuse brainstem glioma in children
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – children with newly diagnosed diffuse brainstem glioma
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – newly diagnosed, diffuse, intrinsic brain stem glioma
——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002 – typical diffuse pontine glioma
or
histologically proven anaplastic astrocytoma/glioblastoma multiforme located in the pons

——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002 – pontine glioma patients
——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002 – paediatric patients with pontine gliomas
——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002
brain tumours
brain stem glioma

——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002
Histological diagnoses included

8 – glioblastoma multiforme
5 – no histology
3 – anaplastic astrocytoma
3 – astrocytoma with no other specification
1 – pilocytic astrocytoma

——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – Brainstem gliomas
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – diffuse intrinsic pontine tumor
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – high grade glioma was required for nonpontine brain stem tumors
——————————————————————
[7] .3/15/1999 children with newly diagnosed brainstem tumor
——————————————————————
[7] .3/15/1999 tumors arising in the pons
——————————————————————
[7] .3/15/1999 diffusely infiltrating pontine lesion
——————————————————————
[8] 1/1998 – children with diffuse pontine gliomas
——————————————————————
[8] 1/1998 – pediatric malignancies
——————————————————————
[8] 1/1998 – Diffuse pontine gliomas
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – Brain stem gliomas
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – childhood brain tumors
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – children with brain stem gliomas
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – patients with diffuse intrinsic brain stem gliomas
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – children with diffuse intrinsic brain stem gliomas
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
# OF CHILDREN
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[8] 1/1998 – 9 / 100% – consecutive children
——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002 – 20 – enrolled (9 male / 11 female)
——————————————————————
[2] 5/1/2010 – 20 – children accrued
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – 31 – children enrolled
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – 33 / 100% – patients enrolled
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – 34 / 100% – patients enrolled
——————————————————————
[1] 4/2011 – 63 / 100% – children enrolled in study
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – 66 children
——————————————————————
[7] .3/15/1999
130 – eligible patients
66 – arm 1
64 – arm 2
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
# OF EVALUABLE CHILDREN
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[8] 1/1998 – 9 / 100% – consecutive children evaluable
——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002 – 12 – Evaluable patients
——————————————————————
[2] 5/1/2010 – 20 – children evaluable
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – 30 – eligible and evaluable for survival and toxicity
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – 33 / 100% – patients evaluable
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – 34 / 100% – patients evaluable
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – 58 / 100% – evaluable patients
——————————————————————
[1] 4/2011 – 63 / 100% – children evaluable
——————————————————————
[7] .3/15/1999
130 – evaluable patients
66 – arm 1
64 – arm 2
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
AGE RANGE OF CHILDREN
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[5] .10/21/2002 – 3-17 years of age
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – 3.6–15.4 years
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – 3–21 – age children enrolled
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – 3-21 years – eligible for current multiinstitutional study
——————————————————————
[7] .3/15/1999 3-21 years of age
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
MEDIAN AGE OF CHILDREN
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[5] .10/21/2002 – 6 years – median age
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – 6.4 years – Median age at diagnosis
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – 7.5 years – mean age at diagnosis
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – 7.8 years – median age of patients
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – 8 – median age (3–14 years)
——————————————————————
[2] 5/1/2010 – 8.3 years – mean age
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
1 YEAR OR LESS SURVIVAL RATES
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[1] 4/2011 – 9 / 14% – mean 1-year Event-Free Survival (EFS)
——————————————————————
[1] 4/2011 – 14 / 21.9% – no evidence produced 1-year Event-Free Survival (EFS) rate higher than
——————————————————————
10/2006..5 / 26% – 1 year: Burzynski Antineoplastons: Progression-Free Survival Rate (PFS): Protocol – BT-11 BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS and multicentric tumors (MBSG) (Pg. 466)
——————————————————————
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
10/2004..9 / 29%Burzynski Antineoplastons: 1 year Progression-Free Survival (PFS): Protocol – patients with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG): Special Exception (SE) (Pg. 386)
——————————————————————
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
[9] .9/15/1994 – 20 / 35% – 1 year Overall Survival
——————————————————————
3/2006..39%Burzynski Antineoplastons Patients with high-grade, recurrent and progressive BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS: Progression-Free Survival (PFS) at 6 months: BRAINSTEM GLIOMA (BSG) (Pgs. 40 + 44-45)
——————————————————————
[1] 4/2011 – 25 / 40% – mean 1-year Overall Survival (OS)
——————————————————————
10/2004..12 / 41%Burzynski l: 1 year Progression-Free Survival (PFS): Protocol – patients with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) (Pg. 386)
——————————————————————
3/2004 – 43%Burzynski Antineoplastons – % of responding Patients didn’t develop Progression: 6/1/2003 Protocol – BT-11 – BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pg. 51)
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – 16 / 48% – 1 year estimated Survival rate
——————————————————————
10/2006..10 / 53%Burzynski Antineoplastons 1 year Overall Survival Rate (OS): Protocol – BT-11 BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS and multicentric tumors (MBSG) (Pg. 466)
——————————————————————
3/2004 – 61%Burzynski Antineoplastons % of Objective Response (OR) Patients hadn’t had Progression: 6/1/2003 Protocol – HIGH-GRADE GLIOMA (Pg. 53)
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – 27 / 90% – 1 year  - Overall survival
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
LESS THAN 1 YEAR SURVIVAL (MST)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
3/2006.-.6 months – Patients with Recurrent Tumors Survive no more than, despite standard treatment: (Pgs. 40 + 45-46)
——————————————————————
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
2003 – 6.4 monthsBurzynski Antineoplastons Median Survival: Protocol patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA: BT-11 Special Exception (SE) (Pg. 99)
——————————————————————
2003 – 7 monthsBurzynski Antineoplastons Median Survival: Protocol patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA: BT-11 (Pg. 99)
——————————————————————
3/2004 – 7 monthsBurzynski Antineoplastons – Progression-Free Survival (PFS): 6/1/2003 Protocol – BT-11 BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pg. 51)
——————————————————————
3/2004 – 7 monthsBurzynski Antineoplastons Progression-Free Survival (PFS): Protocol – subgroup very difficult to treat recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pg. 52)
——————————————————————
[7] 3/15/1999 – 8 months – ARM 2: Median time to Death: radiation therapy and chemotherapy with cisplatin (Mandell et al.) (6/1992 – 10/1997) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
[7] 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
——————————————————————
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
[7] 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
3/2004 – 10.3 monthsBurzynski Antineoplastons – Median Overall Survival from start of Treatment (OST): 6/1/2003 Protocol – BT-11 BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pg. 51)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
1 YEAR SURVIVAL
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3/2004 – 12 months (1 year)Burzynski Antineoplastons: Progression-Free Survival (PFS): 6/1/2003 Protocol – HIGH-GRADE GLIOMA (Pg. 53)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
1+ YEAR SURVIVAL
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3/2004 – 13.7 months (1 year 1.7 months)Burzynski Antineoplastons: Median Overall Survival from Diagnosis (OSD): 6/1/2003 Protocol – BT-11 BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pg. 51)
——————————————————————
4/2007 – 16.4 months (1 year 4.4 months)Burzynski Antineoplastons(ANP): Median Survival (MST): Protocol – newly diagnosed diffuse, intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMAs (NDBSG) BT-11 (Pg. 206)
——————————————————————
3/2004 – 17 months (1 year 5 months) – Median Survival without Treatment (Pg. 53)
——————————————————————
2006 – 19.9 months (1 year 7.9 months) – Median Survival Time (MST): next best traditional standard of care study (Pg. 172)
——————————————————————
2006 – 19.9 months (1 year 7.9 months)Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP): Median Survival Time (MST): Treatments for Astrocytic Tumors – recurrent and progressive tumor: Treatment of diffuse, intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMA in children (Pg. 172)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2 YEAR SURVIVAL
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3/2006 – 2 years – Most Patients with BRAINSTEM GLIOMA fail standard radiation therapy and chemotherapy and don’t survive longer: (Pgs. 40 + 45-46)
——————————————————————
[7] 3/15/1999 – 4 / 6.7% – ARM 2: 2 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
[7] 3/15/1999 – 7% – 2 year Overall Survival (OS): 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
——————————————————————
[7] 3/15/1999 – 9 / 7.1% – ARM 1: 2 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) 2004 (Pg. 58)
——————————————————————
Less than 10% – 2 year Survival: standard radiation therapy: for newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG)
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – 3 / 10% – 2 years – Overall survival
——————————————————————
10/2006..3 / 16% – 2 years: Burzynski Antineoplastons: Progression-Free Survival Rate (PFS): Protocol – BT-11 BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS and multicentric tumors (MBSG) (Pg. 466)
——————————————————————
10/2006..6 / 32% – 2 year Overall Survival Rate (OS): Burzynski Antineoplastons: Protocol – BT-11 BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS and multicentric tumors (MBSG) (Pg. 466)
——————————————————————
2003 – 4 / 33.3% – 2 year Survival: Burzynski Antineoplastons Protocol patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA: BT-11 (Pgs. 91-92)
——————————————————————
3/2006 – 39% – 2 year Overall Survival: Burzynski Antineoplastons: Patients with high-grade, recurrent and progressive BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS (BSG) (Pgs. 40 + 44-45)
——————————————————————
4/2007 – 8 / 40% – 2 year Overall Survival (OS): Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP): Protocol – newly diagnosed diffuse, intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMAs (NDBSG) BT-11 (Pg. 206)
——————————————————————
2004 – 42% – 2 year Patients (Surviving) Survival: Burzynski Antineoplastons: 6/1/2003 Protocol – BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pgs. 52-53)
——————————————————————
10/2004..13 / 45% – 2 year Overall Survival (Survival: Special Exception (SE)) Burzynski Antineoplastons: Protocol – patients with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) (Pg. 386)
——————————————————————
2006 – 14 / 46.7% – 2 year Overall Survival (OS) (%) – Efficacy: Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP): Treatments for Astrocytic Tumors – recurrent and progressive tumor: Treatment of diffuse, intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMA in children (Pg. 172)
——————————————————————
2006 – 30 / 46.7% – 2 year Overall Survival (OS) (%) – Efficacy: next best traditional standard of care study (Pg. 172)
——————————————————————
7/2005 – 5 / 50% – 2 year Overall Survival: Burzynski Antineoplastons: children less than 4 years old with inoperable BRAIN STEM GLIOMAs (BSG) BT-11 (study and Special Exception (SE)) (Pg. 300)
——————————————————————
2006 – 6 / 60% – 2 year Overall Survival (OS) (%) – Efficacy: Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) – recurrent and progressive (RPS) tumors in children aged <4y: children less than 4 years old with inoperable BRAIN STEM GLIOMAS (Pg. 172) 2005
——————————————————————
2006 – 6 / 60% – 2-year Survival rate: Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) – children aged <4 years diagnosed with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) treated with ANP (Pg. 173) 2005
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2+ YEARS PATIENTS SURVIVED
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3/2006 – 2+ years – Most Patients with Newly Diagnosed High-Grade BRAIN STEM GLIOMAS (HBSG) don’t Survive more than: (Pgs. 40 + 45-46)
——————————————————————
2006 – 12 / >40% – 2+ year patients survived Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) recurrent and progressive diffuse intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMA (DBSG) (Pg. 173)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3 YEAR OVERALL SURVIVAL
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[9] .9/15/1994 – 7 / 11% – 3 years Overall Survival
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
4+ YEARS FROM START OF TREATMENT
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2003 – 4+ years – 1 alive – From start of Treatment: Burzynski Antineoplastons Protocol patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA: BT-11 (Pgs. 91-92)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
LONG TERM SURVIVORS
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2003 – 5+ years – 1 alive – Burzynski Antineoplastons: From start of Treatment: Protocol patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA: BT-11 (Pgs. 91-92)
——————————————————————
[7] 3/15/1999 – 0% – 5 year Overall Survival (OS): 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
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – 5 / 15% – long term survivors who remained in continuous remission after mean follow-up period of 79 months {6 years 7 months} (46–104 months [3 years 10 months – 8 years 8 months])
——————————————————————
10/2006..3 / 16% – 5 year Overall Survival Rate (OS): Burzynski Antineoplastons: Protocol – BT-11 BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS and multicentric tumors (MBSG) (Pg. 466)
——————————————————————
10/2004..5 / 16% – 5 years: Burzynski Antineoplastons: Overall Survival (Survival: Special Exception (SE)) Protocol – patients with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG): Special Exception (SE) (Pg. 386)
——————————————————————
7/2005 – 2 / 20% – 5 year Overall Survival: Burzynski Antineoplastons: children less than 4 years old with inoperable BRAIN STEM GLIOMAs (BSG) BT-11 (study and Special Exception (SE)) (Pg. 300)
——————————————————————
2005 – 2 / 20% – 5 year Overall Survival (OS) (%) – Efficacy: Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) – recurrent and progressive (RPS) tumors in children aged <4y: children less than 4 years old with inoperable BRAIN STEM GLIOMAS 2006 (Pg. 172)
——————————————————————
2005 – 2 / 20% – 5-year Survival rate: 2006 Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) – children aged <4 years diagnosed with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) treated with ANP (Pg. 173)
——————————————————————
3/2006 – 22%Burzynski Antineoplastons 5 year Overall Survival: Patients with high-grade, recurrent and progressive BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS (BSG) (Pgs. 40 + 44-45)
——————————————————————
10/2004..7 / 24% – 5 years: Burzynski Antineoplastons: Overall Survival (Survival: Special Exception (SE)) Protocol – patients with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) (Pg. 386)
——————————————————————
4/2007 – 6 / 30% – 5 year Overall Survival (OS): Burzynski Antineoplastons ((ANP): Protocol – newly diagnosed diffuse, intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMAs (NDBSG) BT-11 (Pg. 206)
——————————————————————
2005 – 9 / 30% – 5 year Overall Survival (OS) (%) – Efficacy: Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP): Treatments for Astrocytic Tumors – recurrent and progressive tumor: Treatment of diffuse, intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMA in children 2006 (Pg. 172)
——————————————————————
2005 – 9 / 30% – 5+ year patients survived Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) recurrent and progressive diffuse intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMA (DBSG) 2006 (Pg. 173)
——————————————————————
2003 – 2 / 17% – 5+ years Alive and Tumor Free since Initial Diagnosis: Burzynski Antineoplastons: Protocol patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA: BT-11 (Pgs. 91-92)
——————————————————————
9 / 30% – 5+ year patients survived 2006 Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) recurrent and progressive diffuse intrinsic BRAINSTEM GLIOMA (DBSG) (Pgs. 172-173)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
SURVIVAL
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
[2] 5/1/2010 – 6.9 months – Progression-Free Survival (PFS)
——————————————————————
[5] .10/21/2002 – 8 months – Overall Median Survival
——————————————————————
[3] 2/2008 – 9 months (3–36 months [3 years]) – Median Survival (MS)
——————————————————————
[2] 5/1/2010 – 9.15 months – Median Overall Survival
——————————————————————
[1] 4/2011 – 9.6 months – Median Time to Death
——————————————————————
[4] 1/1/2005 – 12 months (1 year) – Median Survival (MS)
——————————————————————
[6] .9/15/1999 – 12 months (1 year) – Overall Survival (5–104+ months [5 months – 8 years 8+ months])
======================================
2 YEARS 2.3 MONTHS MEDIAN SURVIVAL TIME (MST)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2006 – 26.3 months (2 years 2.3 months)Burzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) – Median Survival Time (MST): recurrent and progressive (RPS) tumors in children aged <4y: children less than 4 years old with inoperable BRAIN STEM GLIOMAS 2005 (Pg. 172)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3 YEARS MEDIAN OVERALL SURVIVAL FROM DIAGNOSIS (OSD)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2004 – 3 years – with treatment, may approach (Pg. 53)
——————————————————————
2004 – 3 years Burzynski Antineoplastons Median Overall Survival from Diagnosis (OSD): 6/1/2003 Protocol – HIGH-GRADE GLIOMA (Pg. 53)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
5+ YEARS SURVIVAL
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3/2006 – 5+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Survival in recurrent diffuse intrinsic GLIOBLASTOMAS and anaplastic ASTROCYTOMAS of the BRAINSTEM in a small group of Patients: BRAINSTEM GLIOMA (BSG) Patient with GLIOBLASTOMA (Pgs. 40 + 44-45)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
6+ YEARS MAXIMUM SURVIVAL (MS)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
7/2005 – 6+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Maximum Survival (MS): children less than 4 years old with inoperable BRAIN STEM GLIOMAs (BSG) BT-11 (study and Special Exception (SE)) (Pg. 300)
——————————————————————
6+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons Patient with recurrent, diffuse, intrinsic GLIOBLASTOMA MULTIFORME (GBM)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
6.3 YEARS MEDIAN OVERALL SURVIVAL FROM DIAGNOSIS (OSD)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2004 – 6.3 yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Median Overall Survival from Diagnosis (OSD): 6/1/2003 Protocols – LOW-GRADE GLIOMA IN CHILDREN (Pg. 50)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
7+ YEARS LONGEST / MAXIMUM SURVIVAL
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3/2004 – 7+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Longest Survival (the Patients are currently alive): Protocol – subgroup very difficult to treat recurrent diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pg. 52)
——————————————————————
2006 – 7+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons (ANP) – Maximum Survival (MS): children aged <4 years diagnosed with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) treated with ANP (Pg. 173)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
7.5+ YEARS MAXIMUM SURVIVAL (MS)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2004 – 7.5+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons Maximum Survival (MS): 6/1/2003 Protocol – BT-11 BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (Pg. 51)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
9+ YEARS MAXIMUM SURVIVAL (MS)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
10/2006 – 9+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Maximum Survival Rate: Protocol – BT-11 BRAINSTEM GLIOMAS and multicentric tumors (MBSG) (Pg. 466)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
11 YEARS MAXIMUM SURVIVAL (MS)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
10/2004..11 yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Maximum Survival: Protocol – patients with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG): Special Exception (SE): (high-grade diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) recurrent after radiation and chemotherapy) (Pg. 386)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
12.5+ YEARS MAXIMUM SURVIVAL (MS)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
2004 – 12.5+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Maximum Survival (MS): 6/1/2003 Protocol – HIGH-GRADE GLIOMA (Pg. 53)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
15.5+ YEARS MAXIMUM SURVIVAL (MS)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
10/2004 – 15.5+ yearsBurzynski Antineoplastons: Maximum Survival: Protocol – patients with diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG): (high-grade diffuse intrinsic BRAIN STEM GLIOMA (DBSG) recurrent after radiation and chemotherapy) (Pg. 386)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
17+ YEARS MAXIMUM SURVIVAL (MS)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
3/2006 – 17+ years (approaching 18 years)Burzynski Antineoplastons: BRAINSTEM GLIOMA (BSG) Maximum Survival for Patient with recurrent, diffuse, intrinsic anaplastic ASTROCYTOMA (Pgs. 40 + 44-45)
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
Burzynski: BRAINSTEM GLIOMAs (DBSG):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/burzynski-brainstem-gliomas-dbsg/
======================================
References:
======================================
[1] 4/2011 – children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas
======================================
Temozolomide in the treatment of children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21345842/
Neuro Oncol. 2011 Apr;13(4):410-6. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noq205. Epub 2011 Feb.22
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21345842/
Neuro-oncology 2011 Apr; 13(4):410-6
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3064697/
The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, USA
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3064697/pdf/noq205.pdf
the Children’s Oncology Group
http://m.neuro-oncology.oxfordjournals.org/content/13/4/410.long?view=long&pmid=21345842
open-label phase II study (ACNS0126)
7/6/2004-9/6/2005
======================================
[2] 5/1/2010 – Children With Newly Diagnosed Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma
======================================
Prospective Evaluation of Radiotherapy With Concurrent and Adjuvant Temozolomide in Children With Newly Diagnosed Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19647954/
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 May 1;77(1):113-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.04.031. Epub 2009 Aug 3
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19647954/
International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 77, Issue 1 , Pages 113-118, 1 May 2010
http://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(09)00597-5/abstract
published online 03 August 2009
Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
Presented at the Eighth Congress of the European Association for Neuro-Oncology, Barcelona, Spain, September 12–14, 2008
3/2005-11/2006
======================================
[3] 2/2008 – children with diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma
======================================
Research Article
Treatment of children with diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma with radiotherapy, vincristine and oral VP-16: A Children’s Oncology Group phase II study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17278121/
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2008 Feb;50(2):227-30
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17278121/
Pediatr Blood Cancer 2008;50:227–230
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pbc.21154/abstract
Pediatric Blood & Cancer
Volume 50, Issue 2, pages 227–230, February 2008
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pbc.21154/abstract;jsessionid=1C9E44F96D6558468F0D7EB45D50FE23.d04t03
Pediatric Blood & Cancer
Volume 50, Issue 2, Article first published online: 2 FEB 2007
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pbc.21154/full
The Pediatric Oncology Group (POG, now part of the Children’s Oncology Group)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pbc.21154/pdf
DOI 10.1002/pbc.21154
http://radonc.ucsd.edu/patient-info/treatment-options/cancer-types/pediatric-cancers/Documents/Pediatric-Paper-04.pdf
University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA
======================================
[4] 1/1/2005 – newly diagnosed diffuse brainstem glioma in children
======================================
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
Cancer. 2005 Jan 1;103(1):133-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15565574
Cancer 103, 133-139
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/abstract;jsessionid=6717837591CCC8FCBD8E46163808E221.d03t01
Cancer
Volume 103, Issue 1, pages 133–139, 1 January 2005
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/full
Article first published online: 24 NOV 2004
References:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/references
Cited By:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.20741/citedby
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20741
Department of Hematology-Oncology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
======================================
[5] .10/21/2002 – paediatric pontine glioma
======================================
Treatment of paediatric pontine glioma with oral trophosphamide and etoposide
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12434281/
Br J Cancer. 2002 Oct 21;87(9):945-9
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12434281/
British Journal of Cancer (2002) 87, 945–949. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6600552
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2364312/
Published online 21 October 2002
http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v87/n9/full/6600552a.html
St. Hedwigs Klinik, Hämato/Onkologie, Steinmetzstr. 1–3, Regensburg, Germany
http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v87/n9/pdf/6600552a.pdf
======================================
[6] .9/15/1999 – brainstem gliomas
======================================
A Phase I/II study of carboplatin combined with hyperfractionated radiotherapy for
brainstem gliomas

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990915)86:6%3C1064::AID-CNCR24%3E3.0.CO;2-1/full
Cancer 1999;86:1064–9
1999 American Cancer Society
Cancer
Volume 86, Issue 6, pages 1064–1069, 15 September 1999
Article first published online: 20 NOV 2000
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990915)86:63.0.CO;2-1
======================================
[7] 3/15/1999 children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic brainstem tumors
======================================
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/
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Mar 15;43(5):959-64
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10192340/
International Journal of Radiation Oncology * Biology * Physics
Volume 43, Issue 5 , Pages 959-964, 15 March 1999
http://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(98)00501-X/abstract
Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY 10029-6574, USA
======================================
[8] 1/1998 – children with newly diagnosed diffuse pontine gliomas
======================================
Carboplatin and etoposide with hyperfractionated radiotherapy in children with newly diagnosed diffuse pontine gliomas: a phase I/II study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9371386/
Med Pediatr Oncol. 1998 Jan;30(1):28-33
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9371386/
Medical and Pediatric Oncology
Volume 30, Issue 1, pages 28–33, January 1998
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1096-911X(199801)30:13.0.CO;2-2/abstract;jsessionid=94E4BFEF2606B89ADDD9682528353D47.d03t02
Article first published online: 7 DEC 1998
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1096-911X(199801)30:13.0.CO;2-2/pdf
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-911X(199801)30:13.0.CO;2-2
Department of Hematology-Oncology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, University of Tennessee, Memphis, USA
Pediatric Oncology
======================================
[9] .9/15/1994 – children with brain stem gliomas
======================================
Outcome of children with brain stem gliomas after treatment with 7800 cGy of hyperfractionated radiotherapy. A Childrens Cancer Group Phase I/II Trial
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8082086/
Cancer. 1994 Sep 15;74(6):1827-34
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8082086/
Department of Neurology, Children’s National Medical Center, Washington, DC
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
======================================
The Burzynski Skeptics:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/the-burzynski-skeptics/
======================================
Perfessor Robert J. (Bob) Blaskiewicz Blatherskitewicz:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/the-burzynski-b-s-app/
======================================
Bob Blaskiewicz (Blatherskitewicz), Faux Skeptic Exposed!:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/bob-blaskiewicz-blatherskitewicz-faux-skeptic-exposed/
======================================
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/
======================================
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/
======================================
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/
======================================
“The Skeptics” (Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, Part II):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/the-skeptics/
======================================
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

Advertisements

Critiquing: Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski, M.D., Ph.D, LIAR: Stanislaw Burzynski versus the BBC

Believe in Facts ???

Get out the popcorn !!!
——————————————————————
Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski is a liar

Let me put that in bold for emphasis

Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski is a liar

Open wide and say ahhhhhhh …

DR. DAVID H. “ORAC” GORSKI IS A LIAR
——————————————————————
Much better !!!

Some things just look much better when they come in 3’s

And that must be what “Orac” is god thinks, since he seems to live by the the edict of the 3 wise monkeys:
——————————————————————
See No Evil

Hear No Evil

Speak No Evil
——————————————————————
Of course, to Gorski, Evil is any truth which he disagrees with, which he acts like does NOT exist, and obviously can NOT find on the Internet with his Commodore 64, or whatever piece of garbage he’s using, which he must have set to block any websites he wishes to NOT see
——————————————————————
Gorski, the Hypocrite, calls me a “CRANK”, which is especially hilarious, considering how much better my research is than his, without the bias

LIES

Misdirection

Disinformation

Misinformation

MisDisInformation
——————————————————————
David Gorski (@gorskon) tweeted at 3:24am – 14 Jul 13:

@Funkmon @HoracioHornblow Ha ha. It’s the rather pathetic crank Didymus Judas Thomas. That guy couldn’t buy a clue. #Burzynski

——————————————————————
If I wanted to lower myself to Gorski’s level, I could delete comments from my blog
——————————————————————
6/4/2013, Gorski must have evacuated this from deep within his bowels:
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
Stanislaw Burzynski versus the BBC
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/04/stanislaw-burzynski-versus-the-bbc/
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
I was busy at the time reviewing the British Broadcasting Corporation’s Panorama bit on Burzynski:
======================================
6/4/2013

The British are Coming, The British are Coming: Critiquing “Curing cancer or ‘selling hope’ to the vulnerable?”:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/04/the-british-are-coming-the-british-are-coming-critiquing-curing-cancer-or-selling-hope-to-the-vulnerable/
======================================
6/7/2013

IT MAY NOT BE SCIENCE: Critiquing “Curing cancer or ‘selling hope’ to the vulnerable?”:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/it-may-not-be-science-critiquing-curing-cancer-or-selling-hope-to-the-vulnerable/
======================================
But now that I have some time, lets all enjoy Gorski’s LIES

Misdirection

Disinformation

Misinformation

MisDisInformation

While I DISS his MisDisInformation

Since the dates involved are important in exposing Gorski’s LIES, Gorski states:
——————————————————————
“After yesterday’s epic deconstruction of the latest propaganda-fest from … Eric Merola, on his most admired subject, “brave maverick doctor” Stanislaw Burzynski”
——————————————————————
(6/3/2013) in relation to Gorski’s cherry-picked “review” which I critiqued:
======================================
7/18/2013

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/
======================================
Gorski posits:
——————————————————————
“I needed something science-based to cleanse the rancid taste of intelligence-insulting nonsense from my mind”
——————————————————————
My understanding of Gorski’s definition of #ScienceBasedMedicine is:

1. Visualize a Victim

2. Create biased blogposts utilizing:

a. LIES

b. Misdirection

c. Disinformation

d. Misinformation

e. MisDisInformation

Gorski advises:
——————————————————————
“I was interviewed over the phone by a producer of the show and exchanged e-mails to answer questions”
——————————————————————
I am NOT certain what qualifications BBC Panorama thought that Gorski has in order for him to be interviewed about Burzynski, unless they wanted the perspective of a LIAR

Gorski mentions “False balance”, which readers of his and / or my blog are all too familiar with when it comes to “Orac”

He whines that there is:
——————————————————————
” … zero mention of how Burzynski recently managed to beat an effort by the Texas Medical Board to strip him of his medical license by throwing his employed doctors under the bus …”
——————————————————————
This seems to be:

Misdirection

Disinformation

Misinformation

by Gorski, as anyone can read the case documents:
======================================
Burzynski: Texas Medical Board (TMB) and State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH):
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/burzynski-texas-medical-board-tmb-and-state-office-of-administrative-hearings-soah/
======================================
and note that, as Richard A. Jaffe points out, Burzynski was:

1. NOT even in the USA during one of the patients care

2. there was no evidence that Burzynski met either patient

3. Burzynski was NOT the Doctor of Record for either patient

4. If the SOAH had an actual case, they could have gone after the actual Doctors of Record

What Gorski blogs is NOT worth the paper it is NOT written on

EVERYTHING Gorski blogs should be “Fact-Checked” for accuracy

He also ejects:
——————————————————————
” … only the most superficial treatment of how in general it is considered unethical to demand payment from patients to participate in clinical trials”
——————————————————————
though he provides NO basis in FACT for this statement

He also laments:
——————————————————————
“No, and there isn’t any mention of how the Burzynski Clinic waged a campaign of harassment against bloggers who criticized Burzynski back in 2011”
——————————————————————
What Gorski does NOT mention is that:

there isn’t any mention of how the bloggers waged a campaign of harassment against Burzynski

with their:

LIES

Misdirection

Disinformation

Misinformation
======================================
I find Rhys Morgan abnormally prehensile:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/i-find-rhys-morgan-abnormally-prehensile/
======================================
Gorski cries:
——————————————————————
“Indeed, one of the victims of that harassment, Rhys Morgan, was interviewed by the Panorama crew, but he was informed that his interview was cut from the final version because it didn’t fit the narrative”
——————————————————————
I thought it humorous when The Skeptics™ whined on Twitter that Rhys Morgan wasn’t going to make the cut

What was he going to say ?

How he copied all of his Burzynski blogsplats from other people’s blogs?

Gorski mentions:
——————————————————————
“All you have to do is to read Saul Green’s reports on Quackwatch and in The Cancer Letter from the 1990s”
——————————————————————
Of course, Gorski conveniently forgets to mention Green’s Confict-of-Interest, since Green was associated with a lawsuit against Burzynski

But then again, Gorski seems to have conveniently forgotten his own possible COI, which someone posted a link to on Twitter:
——————————————————————
David Gorski’s Financial PHARMA Ties What He Didn’t Tell You:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/06/david-gorskis-financial-pharma-ties-what-he-didnt-tell-you.html
——————————————————————
Gorski fumes:
——————————————————————
“One of them reminded me very much of the conversation with her NHS oncologist that Laura Hymas recorded and allowed Eric Merola to include in his propaganda piece, except that in video it is so much more intense”

“In this scene, the oncologist tries to point out to Ms. Petagine that he doesn’t know what Burzynski is doing or how to take care of her daughter when she returns”
——————————————————————
I guess the National Heath Service oncologist is possibly like Gorski, and he doesn’t know what Burzynski is doing because he has NOT read Burzynski’s publications:
=====================================
7/22/2013

Critiquing: In which Orac does Stanislaw Burzynski propagandist Eric Merola a favor… :
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/critiquing-in-which-orac-does-stanislaw-burzynski-propagandist-eric-merola-a-favor/
======================================
Gorski flabbergasts:
——————————————————————
“The report includes interviews with experts like Professor Richard Grundy of Nottingham Children’s Hospital”

“Grundy points out that Burzynski has not published the complete results of any of his phase II clinical trials”
——————————————————————
What Gorski does NOT point out, is that for being a supposed “expert”, he sure does NOT give the impression that he’s taken the time to read Burzynski’s 2003-2010 phase II (2) clinical trials preliminary reports, in order to qualify as an “expert” on anything related to Burzynski

Gorski continues on as is his custom of being long-winded without much in the way of results:
——————————————————————
” … how Burzynski has abused the clinical trial process to keep treating patients with antineoplastons without actually having to do the science that any other doctor would be required to do to validate a new treatment”
——————————————————————
However, Gorski FAILS to address these issues:
======================================
WHAT IS MISDIRECTION? Critiquing “Antineoplastons: Has the FDA kept its 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/
======================================
Gorski marches onward, jackbooted:
——————————————————————
“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, what the preclinical evidence supporting their efficacy are, or what the scientific rationale is to expect that they might have antitumor activity”

“(Yes, we’re talking prior plausibility, baby!)”
——————————————————————
So, Gorski is saying that Dr. Elloise Garside has something in common with the “expert”, Professor Richard Grundy

Gorski rants on:
——————————————————————
“The preponderance of evidence supports the contention that they dont’ work, but there is uncertainty, which Burzynski exploits to the max”
——————————————————————
Amazing !!!

The United States Food and Drug Administration has authorized phase III (3) clinical trials, which means:
======================================
“[T]he emphasis in Phase 2 is on EFFECTIVENESS”

“Phase 3 studies begin if EVIDENCE of EFFECTIVENESS is shown in Phase 2″
======================================
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/
======================================
Gorski then blesses us with:
——————————————————————
” … the claims in some of the Q&A’s after screenings of Eric Merola’s most recent movie that Burzynski’s papers have been rejected without being sent out for peer review”

“Studies submitted to journals won’t be published without going out for peer-review”

“Maybe he’s referring to some of the papers we’ve heard about from Mr. Cohen and others that were editorially rejected and not even sent out for peer review because the editor either didn’t think them appropriate or didn’t want to waste the reviewers’ time”
——————————————————————
Gorski, who did a “review” of Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II (2), 6/3/2013, somehow magically “forgets” the very next day, that the documentary indicates that Burzynski submitted a phase II (2) clinical trial for publication, and was refused in 2 hours 8 minutes and 51 seconds, and Gorski is as silent as the dead about the lame reason given for NOT publishing it
======================================
See #12:
======================================
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/
======================================
How disingenuous, Gorski

Your opinion should mean

Nada

Zip

Zero

“Orac,” the false god continues on his rampage:
——————————————————————
“In science, all that matters is what you publish, and Burzynski hasn’t published anything other than case reports, tiny case series, and unconvincing studies, mostly (at least over the last decade or so) in crappy journals not even indexed on PubMed”
——————————————————————
Gorski gives NO reason for NOT doing what I have done on my blog, or any relevance of a publication NOT being listed on PubMed:
======================================
The #Burzynski B.S. App:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/06/06/the-burzynski-b-s-app-2/
======================================
Gorski comes to what he must think is his penultimate moment:
——————————————————————
“Without a doubt, the most effective part of the story is the segment in which Dr. Jeanine Graf of the Texas Children’s Hospital is introduced”

“Dr. Graf is the director of the pediatric intensive care unit there and has taken care of lots of Burzynski patients, as her hospital is “just down the road” from the Burzynski Clinic and these unfortunate children are brought to her hospital when they decompensate”

“Particularly damning is how Ms. Petagine said that the Texas Children’s Hospital Staff “were always cleaning up Burzynski’s messes.””

“If there’s one thing Panorama did right in this report, it’s showing how seeing so many already dying children show up in our ICU because of hypernatremia due to antineoplaston therapy will do that”
——————————————————————
Again, Gorski FAILS to discuss:
======================================
Burzynski: HYPERNATREMIA:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/burzynski-hypernatremia/
======================================
And:
——————————————————————
“Perhaps the most devastating part of this segment was seeing Dr. Graf stating, point blank, that she’s never seen a Burzynski patient survive”
——————————————————————
What is REALLY “devastating” is that Gorski is NOT able to indicate exactly how MANY patients this allegedly applies to, because, whereas Gorski’s fave reporter, Richard Bilton, wants to know how many Burzynski patients were treated in the phase II (2) clinical trials, he acts like Gorski’s “bud”, Dr. Peter A. Lipson, who also has had “issues” with consistency
======================================
Dr. Peter A. Lipson (and / or his Censor(s)) is a Coward: Critiquing “A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics”:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/dr-peter-a-lipson-and-or-his-censors-is-a-coward-critiquing-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics/
======================================
Gorski then rattles off:
——————————————————————
“Burzynski smirks when asked how many patients he’s treated and how many have survived, dodging the question by saying that the FDA won’t let him until he’s published his results”

“Bilton tells him that’s not true; the FDA has told him that Burzynski can tell him as long as he doesn’t promote antineoplastons”

“Burzynski asks Bilton why he doesn’t have a letter from the FDA”
——————————————————————
If Gorski had bothered to read all the comments I posted on his blog re my Burzynski research, he would know that Burzynski has every right to be wary

But Gorski’s arrogance, dismissiveness, and condescension make him his own worst enemy

He then faceplants:
——————————————————————
“Burzynski then promises that antineoplastons will be approved “soon””

“(they almost certainly won’t)”
——————————————————————
I guess Gorski can now see the future, and is all-knowing and omnipotent

But then again, “Orac” is god

“god” goes on to say:
——————————————————————
“Ultimately, the Burzynski Clinic did release some results, stating that 776 patients with brain tumors were treated in trials and that 15.5% have survived five years”

“Of course, this is an utterly meaningless factoid”

“because we don’t know what kinds of tumors, what gradess, how they were treated beforehand, or any other confounding factors”
——————————————————————
But this is because Gorski prefers NOT to pay attention; welcome to “Short Attention Span Theatre”, or seeming to NOT read Burzynski’s publications:
======================================
Colorado Public Television – PBS:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/colorado-public-television-pbs/
======================================
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/
======================================
Gorski posted comments on the Colorado Public Television (PBS) (CPT12) Facebook page where this was posted:
======================================

======================================
6/5/2013 Gorski continued his blatherskite:
——————————————————————
Odds and ends left over after the Panorama Burzynski Clinic report: Burzynski versus his own SEC filing
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/06/05/odds-and-ends-about-burzynski-clinic/
——————————————————————
This is where I start leading to heapin’ helpings of not-so-Respectful Insolence

Gorski posts:
——————————————————————
“(stay classy, Stash, stay classy)”
——————————————————————
I am NOT positive as to why a LIAR would advise Burzynski to “stay classy” when he has absolutely NO moral or ethical standing to do so

The proverbial “pot calling the kettle, black”

Gorski blathers:
——————————————————————
” … in January the Burzynski Clinic removed all references to antineoplaston therapy on its website … “
——————————————————————
As I stated up top, Gorski must have his computer set so that it will NOT access Burzynski’s website, since I posted this:
======================================
3/12/2013

Burzynski updates Scientific Publications page:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/burzynski-updates-scientific-publications-page/
======================================
This includes the link to Burzynski’s ANTINEOPLASTON publications, which Gorski claims do NOT exist on Burzynski’s website

Perhaps this helps explain Gorski’s lack of knowledge re antineoplastons

Gorski admits:
——————————————————————
“Now I’m not a businessman, and I don’t understand anything but the very basics of business”
——————————————————————
But then goes on to claim:
——————————————————————
“but I do know cancer science”
——————————————————————
Gorski goes on to comment on material which I posted on his blog

Comment #128 Didymus Judas Thomas

At the Tu-Quack Center Correcting Orac’s EPIC & Legendary Research

February 2, 2013
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/01/21/quoth-joe-mercola-i-love-me-some-burzynski-antineoplastons/
“Yet in the report, we read:”
——————————————————————
On February 23, 2010, the Company entered into an agreement with Cycle Solutions, Inc., dba ResearchPoint (“Research Point”) to initiate and manage a pivotal Phase III clinical trial of combination Antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 plus radiation therapy (RT) in patients with newly-diagnosed, diffuse, intrinsic brainstem glioma”
——————————————————————
It’s good to see that in JUNE, Gorski is finally catching up to what I posted on his blog in FEBRUARY

Gorski goes on to comment:
——————————————————————
“Of course, given that after three years the clinical trial hasn’t been opened, more than likely no reputable institution wants to partner with the Burzynski Research Institute, and ResearchPoint collected its checks”
——————————————————————
This is the same Gorski who allegedly blogged about the documentary which covered this issue, which he “supposedly” did a“review” on

Gorski, who above claimed that he does NOT understand “business”, suddenly puts on his “lawyer” hat
——————————————————————
“There’s a lot of legalese and FDA bureau-speak, but the meaning should be fairly clear to a layperson”:

“Indeed, even the report seems to concede that antineoplastons will likely never be approved, even going so far to point out that “the Company cannot predict if and/or when it will submit an NDA [New Drug Application] to the FDA, nor can the Company estimate the number or type of additional trials the FDA may require.””

“Burzynski also warns that “there can be no assurance that an NDA for Antineoplastons, as a treatment for cancer, will ever be approved by the FDA.””

“That hardly sounds as though antineoplastons will be approved “soon.””
——————————————————————
I find it remarkable that Gorski, while admitting above that he does NOT understand
“business”, seemingly expects the reader to believe that he understands “legalese”

Gorski bounds on in his new found knowledge as a “legal mastermind”:
——————————————————————
“Another interesting tidbit in the SEC filing is Burzynski’s report of the results of several of his clinical trials”

“They aren’t really “results’ per se, in that the information presented really isn’t provided in a form that really allows other investigators to evaluate it and potentially replicate it”

“Basically it’s a big table listing Burzynski Research Institute clinical trials and response rates reported”

“One thing that I noticed right away is that in most trials, the number of evaluable patients is smaller, sometimes much smaller, than the number of patients accrued”

“This is a huge red flag”

“For instance, in trial BT-20, there were 40 patients accrued by only 22 were evaluable”

“This sort of dropoout rate is a huge red flag”

“We don’t know the reasons for this dropout rate”

“It could certainly skew the results, but even that’s impossible to tell from just a table of response rates and no further information”
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
The ONLY “HUGE RED FLAG” is how inept Gorski is
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
Gorski, you’re no Craig Masilow, but you are a LIAR
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
I’ve done the 1st one for you
======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/960.pdf

Pg. 96

2 patients unable to be evaluated

patient 2 didn’t have follow-up MRI to determine response

patient 11 died of intratumoral hemorrhage and duration of treatment too short for evaluation of response
======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/970.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/994.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/1145.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/1146.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/1147.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/1194.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/1220.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/1252.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/2105.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/5825.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/7287.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/7853.pdf


=====================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/7898.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/8397.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/8637.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/8638.pdf


======================================
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/images/stories/Publications/8639.pdf


======================================
And THIS is the Gorski who has claimed to have reviewed almost all of Burzynski’s antineoplaston publications
======================================
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/
======================================