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
USA TODAY Liz Szabo Michael Stravato Jerry Mosemak Robert Hanashiro
Before you write a Hack Piece Check Your Facts Please
——————————————————————
——————————————————————
The 3rd, and thankfully final segment of USA TODAY’s “hit-piece” of irresponsible yellow journalism about Dr. Stanislaw R. Burzynski [1], contains the following:
—————————————————————— “Patients stay in hotels while visiting him”
—————————————————————— Pete Cohen made this movie about his and Hannah Bradley’s trip to the Burzynski Clinic
It does NOT look like they stayed in a hotel [2]
——————————————————————
The article continues:
—————————————————————— “If children deteriorate, they often end up in the closest emergency room, said physician Jeanine Graf, director of the pediatric intensive care unit at Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston, who says she has treated at least a dozen of Burzynski’s patients“
——————————————————————
In the 2nd segment of USA TODAY’s yellow journalism “hit-piece,” the reader was advised that Burzynski had treated [3]:
—————————————————————— “ . . . more than 8,000 patients since 1977.”
—————————————————————— Physician Jeanine Graf, “says she has treated at least a dozen“ of Burzynski’s “more than 8,000 patients,”
This means that Dr. Graf has treated LESS THAN 0.15% of Burzynski’s patients
——————————————————————
The article indicates that:
—————————————————————— “Typically, Graf sees Burzynski’s patients after they have become unresponsive, unable to open their eyes or breathe on their own”
“Graf says she’s never seen Burzynski attending to them”
—————————————————————— Why would she ?
Does she ride in the ambulance to and from the clinic ?
As the article makes clear:
“While Burzynski often meets patients on their first trip to the clinic, Jaffe said he is”
“not the treating physician of the clinic’s patients”
“The doctors on Burzynski’s staff have admitting privileges at local hospitals and “attend to patients as needed,” Jaffe said”
——————————————————————
And she continues:
—————————————————————— “And describing her personal experience with Burzynski’s patients, Graf says,”
“I’ve never seen one survive long-term.”
——————————————————————
Are we supposed to believe that pediatric physician Jeanine Graf keeps track of the “more than 8,000 patients” that the articleclaims Burzynski has treated ?
——————————————————————
Continuing on, the article also claims:
—————————————————————— “The unlucky ones end up broke, spending everything on medicine, airfare, hotel rooms and meals while in Houston, Graf says“
“Burzynski’s attorney, Richard Jaffe, notes that all cancer care is expensive”
“I think the clinic’s policies are a lot more charitable than the big institutions,” Jaffe says”
—————————————————————— 6/25/2013 – Medical Bills Are the Biggest Cause of US Bankruptcies [4]
“Bankruptcies resulting from unpaid medical bills will affect nearly 2 million people this year—making health care the No. 1 cause of such filings . . . according to new data”
“. . . estimates that households containing 1.7 million people will file for bankruptcy protection this year”
“Even outside of bankruptcy, about 56 million adults—more than 20 percent of the population between the ages of 19 and 64—will still struggle with health-care-related bills this year . . .”
“Despite the anticipated 2013 dip, such bankruptcies represent about three out of every five filings”
—————————————————————— 2007 – How Many Americans Go Bankrupt Due to Medical Purposes Each Year? [5]
“2007, a Harvard study shows that at least 60% of bankruptcies are related to medical bills“
“Even people with health insurance are filing bankruptcy”
“Insurance premiums, deductibles, co-pay, and out of pocket expenses cause medical bills to drown individuals and families in medical debt”
“Harvard also discovered that 75% of those filing bankruptcy for medical reasons had health insurance“
“It is clear that having health insurance is no guarantee against carrying debt related to health care”
—————————————————————— Burzynski has treated more than 8,000 patients since 1977
8,000 divided by 36 years equals an average of:
222 patients per year
Burzynski is obviously NOT the problem
—————————————————————— Liz Szabo, Michael Stravato, Jerry Mosemak, and Robert Hanashiro
Don’t quit your day jobs
USA TODAY needs to generate readership somehow !!!
—————————————————————— Sarcasm . . . deal with it
====================================== REFERENCES:
====================================== [1] – 11/15/2013
—————————————————————— http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/15/jeanine-graf-cancer-children/2994675/
====================================== [2] – Hannah’s Anectdote:
——————————————————————
Gentlemen, I start your Insolence 😇
—————————————————————— (1:30) [1]
——————————————————————
The “motto” of “The Amazing (Not so Much) Meeting” is “Fighting Fakers,” which is apropos, since I doubt that “Orac” the “Check my Facts” Hack of Dr. David H. Gorski, grasps the irony, that when I read some of his blog articles, you could easily switch his name with the name of some individual he is flogging, and the proverbial shoe fits, and:
—————————————————————— (1:40)
—————————————————————— “This is a guy who sometimes fools even, you know, physicians”
—————————————————————— (I couldn’t have said it better, myself) 😊
—————————————————————— (2:47)
——————————————————————
He states:
“There is a long segment about “The Skeptics”“
(applause) 😝
—————————————————————— (4:25)
—————————————————————— “His lawyer wrote a book”
“About a half of it is about Burzynski“[4]
—————————————————————— 6:00
—————————————————————— Gorski mentions that Burzynski noticed that there were higher levels of these chemicals in healthy people, than people with cancer
——————————————————————
Whereas, Burzynski is on record as having said [5]:
” . . . healthy people have abundance of these chemicals in blood Cancer patients have varied to none“
I did NOT know before now, that GorskGeek thinks that “none” is a “level” 😶
——————————————————————
He continues:
AS2.1 – which is a chemical called phenylacetic acid, which is a byproduct of metabolism that turns into phenylacetylglutamine by the liver
A10 – soluble is basically the same thing
It breaks down to PAG
—————————————————————— WOW !
I thought it was: AS2 – 1 😊
They are “basically the same thing” ? 😳
What does Burzynski say ? [6]
Phenylacetylglutaminate (PG) and Phenylacetate (PN) are metabolites of Phenylbutyrate (PB) and are constituents of antineoplaston AS2-1
PG and PN are naturally occurring in human body as result of metabolism of phenylalanine in liver and kidneys
formulation of antineoplaston AS2-1 is 4:1 mixture of synthetic PN and PG
A10 is 4:1 mixture of PG and iso-PG
That does NOT look like “basically the same thing” to me 😛
—————————————————————— (6:50)
—————————————————————— Gorski founders on:
“And these are substances which were actually studied in the ’50’s and ’60’s and not found to be particularly, um, promising, but, he didn’t know that then”
—————————————————————— GorskGeek has #FAILED miserably to prove that on his blogs [7] 😄
—————————————————————— (8:00)
—————————————————————— Gorski comments about Burzynski’s “animal testing,” “species specific” claims:
“There are ways of getting around that”
——————————————————————
But Gorski, again, has #FAILED miserably to prove it [8] 😅
—————————————————————— (12:00)
—————————————————————— Gorski makes lame excuses about the NCI phase II clinical trial [9] 😖
—————————————————————— (12:50)
—————————————————————— Gorski claims Burzynski was indicted for insurance fraud in the 1997 case 😱
—————————————————————— GorskGeek, care to try and prove that one also ? [10] 😃
—————————————————————— (14:25)
—————————————————————— Gorski then states that out of 61 trials on clinicaltrials . gov, “most” are “closed or unknown”
—————————————————————— GorskGeek #FAILED again 😁
At the time it was:
1 – Not Yet Recruiting
(OPEN)(Phase 3) 1 – COMPLETED
2 – WITHDRAWN
(Withdrawn due to slow enrollment)
7 – WITHDRAWN
(This study has been withdrawn prior to enrollment) (9=WITHDRAWN)
10 – Recruiting (10=OPEN)
40 – Active, not recruiting – (40=CLOSED)
61 =TOTAL
—————————————————————— (15:20)
—————————————————————— Gorski attempts to go all “legal eagle”:
“Listen to Burzynski’s lawyer!”
“You listen to Burzynski’s lawyer; and, and I swear I don’t understand, like why Burzynski would let him, let his lawyer say stuff this damning in his own book, but he does”
“So, get a load of some of these quotes, referring to one of the clinical trials, he says:”
“It was a joke”
“. . . there could not be any possibility of meaningful data coming out of the so-called clinical trial, it was all an artifice, that, you know, designed so that they could continue giving the treatment“
“The FDA wanted all of his patients to be on an IND, so, that’s what we did”
—————————————————————— Gorski, attorney Rick Jaffe is an American, living in America NOT the formerly communist Poland
He can say whatever he wants
GorskGeek is NOT a lawyer 😓
And there’s an excellent reason why
Nor is he schooled in the proper usage of the English language
FACT:
” . . . the so-called clinical trial . . .”
Anyhuman being with a modicum of intelligence about the English language, understands that the term “clinical trial” is singular, i.e. one
Burzynski’s lawyer is obviously referring to the CAN-1 clinical trial mentioned in Burzynski’s 11/25/1997 Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing [11]
One trial that is retrospective is CAN-1 Clinical Trial
—————————————————————— CAN-1 PHASE II STUDY OF ANTINEOPLASTONS A10 AND AS2-1 IN
PATIENTS WITH REFRACTORY MALIGNANCIES
133 patients
—————————————————————— Clinical trial of patients treated by Dr. Burzynski through 2/23/1996
FDA has indicated it will not accept data generated by this trial since it was not a wholly prospective one
—————————————————————— Gorski continues his trend of #FAILURES when he mentions the additional types of treatments that Burzynski was offering, but he #FAILED to mention [12] 😂
—————————————————————— ” … in 1997, his medical practice was expanded to include traditional cancer treatment options such as chemotherapy, gene targeted therapy, immunotherapy and hormonal therapy in response to FDA requirements that cancer patients utilize more traditional cancer treatment options in order to be eligible to participate in the Company’s Antineoplaston clinical trials”
—————————————————————— (18:20)
—————————————————————— Gorski addresses the case of Tori Moreno
—————————————————————— Kim Moreno states:
“We originally were at Miller’s Children at Long Beach Memorial and then went to City of Hope“
“We also sent her MRI’s to Dr. Fred Epstein in New York to be looked at”
Gorski suggests that 3 different opinions could have misdiagnosed Tori Moreno
You can read an interview with Tori’s mother [13]
—————————————————————— (19:45)
—————————————————————— Gorski goes on to mention Burzynski patients going to Texas Children’s Hospital with hypernatremia issues
—————————————————————— Gorski, do you mean this ? [14]
The changing pattern of hypernatremia in hospitalized children
Department of Pediatrics, Texas Children’s Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
—————————————————————— (20:00)
—————————————————————— Gorski mangles the case of Hannah Bradley, who had a grade 3 anaplastic astrocytoma brain tumor
GorskGeek makes excuses like “spontaneous remission”, but then provides no citation, reference, or link to a case of such a tumor having spontaneously exhibited remission [15]
—————————————————————— (20:40)
—————————————————————— Gorski states that antineoplastons are chemotherapy
—————————————————————— No, Gorski, antineoplaston are:
“…an unapproved drug, not ordinary “chemotherapy“[16] 😣
—————————————————————— (21:53)
—————————————————————— Gorski claims in regard to Burzynski’s personalized gene-targeted therapy:
” . . . gives to the patient without regard for synergistic toxicity“
“Boom, there you go”
—————————————————————— Gorski’s #FAIL rate continues, as Burzynski has stated that phase 2 and 3 publications are reviewed as part of this process [17]
Gorski, “BOOM, THERE YOU GO” ッ
—————————————————————— Gorski, you should hire out to the Democratic Party as their mascot, because you must be the biggest pompous ASS I’ve ever seen 😜
Gorski, my advice: don’t quit your day job, HACK 😷
——————————————————————
The #TAM2013 audience then has to suffer through 22:36 of the blatherskite of Robert J. (don’t call me Bobby) “Bob” Blaskiewicz Blatherskitewicz [2]
He blathers about the “dozen,” “17,” “16 dead,” “pancreatic cancer,” “Joseph, who was alive but died well within the life expectancy given his diagnosis,” “Joann, who was alive but died within a year of starting therapy,” “Irene S., who was dead within month,” “Maxine, who was already dead,” the “103 in 2011,” “63 in mid-June,” “17 on original 1999 site,” “about 3 added a year,” the “about 50 stories,” “1/10th of patient names gathered,” “Amelia S. – 7, tumor breaking up,” “Chase,” “Cody – 1994, 20 years ago, 2 visits, 6 weeks treatment breaking up,” “David,” “Janet, 3 – 5 yrs., oncologist, now dead, ovarian cancer,” “Pete took video down,” “8,000 patients,” “probable ischemic necrosis,” “13 yr. old, getting worse getting better, vomited – Marlene, nurse,” “Rory died 2005,” “Supatra, swelling, last wed., brain tumor,” “Side-effect, 2%, sodium load,” “Andrea, U.S. News and World Report, 30% chance recovery, glioblastoma, ANP in luggage, died on plane,” “Cathy wanted to be on ANP, Greg Burzynski, found out only brain tumor,” “Denise D. breast cancer,” and finally:
—————————————————————— (18:45)
—————————————————————— ” … and light as many fires under his butt as we can“
——————————————————————
Mentions Rick Jaffe’s book Galileo’s Lawyer
IT’S ALL ABOUT THE PATIENTS [4]
——————————————————————
All you need to know about Blaskiewicz is:
“White man speak with forked tongue” [18]
——————————————————————
The 3rd video is a panel discussion, which includes “man-crush” tag-team [3]
Robert Blaskiewicz and David Gorski
—————————————————————— (8:00)
—————————————————————— Bob says:
“Yeah, I’m not that type of doctor“
—————————————————————— Bob, the correct answer for you, is:
“I’m NOT a doctor” QUACK
—————————————————————— (13:05)
—————————————————————— Gorski gabs that he’s a:
“Game of Thrones Geek”
——————————————————————
I just knew I was right, GorskGeek [19]
—————————————————————— (14:00)
——————————————————————
The only female panelist mentions “bureaucrats”, “wimps”, and “people without balls”
—————————————————————— 2 out of 3 ain’t bad
She describes the Bob and David show to a T
—————————————————————— (15:00)
——————————————————————
The claim is made that a Burzynski physician appeared on the Burzynski Facebook page announcing results
—————————————————————— (16:00)
—————————————————————— Gorski #whines that the Texas Medical Board wasn’t successful in shutting Burzynski down because of “politics”
—————————————————————— LAUGHABLE
—————————————————————— (20:55)
—————————————————————— Gorski gives his usual excuse:
“He’s not an oncologist”
—————————————————————— GorskiGeek, that claim is as dead as apparently, quite a number of your brain cells [15]
—————————————————————— (34:40)
——————————————————————
Audience members are given the opportunity to speak, and this is the garbage served up:
—————————————————————— “Hi, this is Susan
Ah, don’t forget to mention that Wikipedia has been a major battlefield
We’ve had 23,000 views to the clinic’s page this last month, also rebutr . . .”
—————————————————————— “Control the flow of information”
—————————————————————— Gorski pipes up:
“What she said”
—————————————————————— (35:20)
—————————————————————— Blatherskitewicz chimes in:
“When it comes to Wikipedia can I just mention that is, that is, that that is so effective that Wikipedia was singled out in the most recent Burzynski movie“
—————————————————————— Gorski chirps:
“Yes”
—————————————————————— Bob yacks:
“as being controlled by evil skeptics“
—————————————————————— Gorski ejaculates:
“No, seriously”
—————————————————————— Bob bleats:
“No”
(applause)
—————————————————————— “You have to unleash the evil hoards of skeptics“
“Wahahaha” 👿
—————————————————————— Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski on Wikipedia:
“Simply don’t pay attention to it, because it, it’s not true”
“You won’t be able to, do any, clinical research which we do, without convincing evidence, especially when you have the most powerful agency in the government which is against you“
“So they would love to find something which is wrong with what we are doing”
“Ah, so the fact that they’ve, um, agreed that what we have has value, and they allow us to do phase 3 clinical trials it means that we are right”
“Because, uh, uh, nobody who didn’t have any, concrete evidence that it works, would be able to go as far”
“So whatever Wikipedia says, well, I don’t care for them“
Apparatchiks [20]
====================================== REFERENCES:
====================================== [1] – David Gorski – Why We Fight (Part I): Stanislaw Burzynski Versus Science-Based Medicine – TAM 2013 11/8/2013 (22:44)
——————————————————————
====================================== [2] – Robert Blaskiewicz – Why We Fight (Part II): It’s All About The Patients – TAM 2013 11/8/2013 (22:36)
——————————————————————
====================================== [3] – Medical Cranks And Quacks
TAM 2013 JREF
11/8/2013 (42:42)
——————————————————————
====================================== [4] – “Galileo’s Lawyer”Richard A. Jaffe, Esq.
—————————————————————— http://www.richardjaffe.com
====================================== [5] – 11/9/2013 – Pete Cohen chats with Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski:
—————————————————————— https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/pete-cohen-chats-with-dr-stanislaw-burzynski/
====================================== [6] – 6/2012 – Journal of Cancer Therapy, 2012, 3, 192-200 doi:10.4236/jct.2012.33028 Published Online June 2012, Pg. 192
——————————————————————
12/10/1997 http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=2965068 Burzynski developed
—————————————————————— 6 formulations of natural Antineoplastons
—————————————————————— 6 synthetic formulations of Antineoplastons
====================================== All Phase II clinical trials currently involve use of
—————————————————————— 4 formulations of synthetic Antineoplastons known as A10 and AS2-1 in capsules and injections
====================================== Company currently conducting laboratory research involving
—————————————————————— new generation of Antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1
====================================== In addition to original family of Antineoplaston compounds
(the “Parental Generation”)
Company continues development of
—————————————————————— 2nd generation of Antineoplastons
====================================== In cell culture experiments 2nd generation Antineoplastons developed by Company, have been shown to be at least
——————————————————————
a thousand times more potent then Parental Generation
======================================
Company developing 3rd generation structurally altered Antineoplaston Company believes will exhibit markedly improved anticancer activity in human cancer cell lines resistant to Parental Generation
======================================
10/1997 only 2 clinical trials reached Milestone
——————————————————————
Clinical Trial BT-11
Clinical Trial BT-18
======================================
Clinical Trial BT-18 involving intravenous administration of
Antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1
in treatment of “mixed glioma”, a type of PMBT
HOUSTON, TX – 1/13/2009 –
Burzynski Research Institute, Inc. (BRI) announced it has reached agreement with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that enables company to move forward immediately with pivotal Phase III clinical trial of combination antineoplaston therapy plus radiation therapy in patients with newly-diagnosed, diffuse, intrinsic brainstem glioma
Antineoplaston therapy (ANP) uses synthetic version of naturally occurring peptides & amino acid derivatives found in human body to target & control cancer cells without destroying normal cells
Agreement made under FDA’s Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) procedure & means design & planned analysis of Phase III study is acceptable to support regulatory submission seeking new drug approval
“We are very pleased by our agreement with the FDA to move forward with a confirmatory study on a type of tumor that has shown itself to be highly treatment resistant & challenged further by severely limited treatment options & clinical trials that could expand & discover new, efficacious therapies,” said Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D
“The SPA agreement puts antineoplaston therapy further down a straight path to regulatory approval, enabling the kind of study that should prove its merits as another option to cancer management.”
“BRI has reached this important milestone independently without financial backing from the government, & without a major pharmaceutical partner—a unique accomplishment in the oncology field
From inception, we have been committed to developing a targeted gene therapy option that is less aggressive on the body than conventional therapies & have made considerable progress on the steps mandated by the FDA to bring a new drug to a patient community & cancer type that has unmet needs.”
About Phase III study
Primary objective of randomized study is to compare overall survival of children with newly-diagnosed diffuse intrinsic brainstem glioma (DBSG) who receive combination antineoplaston therapy [Antineoplastons A10 (Atengenal) & AS2-1 (Astugenal)] plus radiation therapy (RT) versus RT alone
DBSG are considered to be 1 of most difficult types of cancer to treat
Combines highly malignant characteristics with very difficult location of brainstem
DBSG are inoperable because they involve most of brainstem (diffuse & intrinsic)
# of children in U.S. with brainstem gliomas is approximately 660
Absent treatment, survival rate from time of diagnosis is 6 months or less
At present, no standard curative treatments for disease
RT is only treatment that may slow its progress, but at 2 years 93% of children with this type of cancer die, & none of them survive for 5 years
Other conventional treatments such as chemotherapy have generally been tried in clinical trials but shown to be ineffective
There are no pharmacological treatments approved for DBSG at this time
Burzynski Research Institute, Inc. (OTCBB: BZYR) is biopharmaceutical company committed to developing treatment for cancer based on genomic & epigenomic principles
Operating loss before other income
2/28/2010 – (4,830,610) – Year Ended
2/28/2009 – (5,127,018) – Year Ended
8/31/2010 – $1,255,692 – Company had net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future income which may be carried forward and will expire if not used between 2012 and 2031 in varying amounts
5/31/2010 – $1,212,249 – net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future income which may be carried forward and will expire if not used between 2012 and 2031 in varying amounts
2/28/2010 – $1,188,847 – net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future income
8/31/2009 – $1,327,454 – net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future income which may be carried forward in varying amounts until 2030
5/31/2009 – $1,250,714 – net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future income which may be carried forward in varying amounts until 2030
Research and development costs
8/31/2010 – $2,421,000 – 6 months ended
Research and development
8/31/2010 – $2,420,725 – 6 Months Ended
Research and development
8/31/2010 – $1,122,339 – 3 Months Ended
Research and development costs
8/31/2010 – $1,122,000 – 3 months ended
8/31/2010 – $7,000 – other research and development costs
Research and development
5/31/2010 – $1,298,386
Research and development costs
5/31/2010 – $1,298,000 – 3 months ended
5/31/2010 – $6,000 – increase in other research and development costs
2/28/2010 – $4,480,000 – Total research and development costs for fiscal years ended
Research and development
2/28/2010 – $4,480,497
Research and development costs
2/28/2010 – $4,480,000 – fiscal year ended
2/28/2010 – $7,000 – decrease in other research and development costs
Research and development
11/30/2009 – $3,214,199 – 9 Months Ended
Research and development costs
11/30/2009 – $3,214,000 – 9 months ended
Research and development
11/30/2009 – $1,146,393 – 9 Months Ended
11/30/2009 – $1,146,000 – 3 months ended
11/30/2009 – $4,000 – other research and development costs
11/30/2009 – $3,000 – other research and development costs
Research and development costs
8/31/2009 – $2,068,000 – 6 months ended
Research and development
8/31/2009 – $2,067,807 – 6 Months Ended
Research and development costs
8/31/2009 – $1,076,000 – 3 months ended
Research and development
8/31/2009 – $1,075,784 – 3 Months Ended
8/31/2009 – $2,000 – other research and development costs
8/31/2009 – $1,000 – other research and development costs
Research and development
5/31/2009 – $992,023
Research and development costs
5/31/2009 – $992,000 – 3 months ended
5/31/2009 – $1,000 – other research and development costs
2/28/2009 – $4,894,255
2/28/2009 – $4,894,000 – fiscal year ended
2/28/2009 – $4,894,000 – Total research and development costs fiscal years ended
Research and development costs
11/30/2008 – $3,755,000 – 9 months ended
11/30/2008 – $3,754,621 – 9 Months Ended
11/30/2008 – $1,288,000 – 3 months ended
11/30/2008 – $1,287,762 – 9 Months Ended
Research and development costs
8/31/2008 – $2,467,000 – 6 months ended
Research and development
8/31/2008 – $2,466,859
Research and development
8/31/2008 – $1,254,049 – 3 Months Ended
Research and development costs
8/31/2008 – $1,254,000 – 3 months ended
Research and development costs
5/31/2008 – $1,213,000 – 3 months ended
Research and development
5/31/2008 – $1,212,810
5/31/2007 – $1,017,452
Research and development costs
5/31/2007 – $1,017,000 – 3 months ended
5/31/2007 – $2,000 – other research and development costs
Research and development costs
5/31/2006 – $1,101,112
5/31/2006 – $1,101,000 – 3 months ended
Research and development costs
11/30/2005 – $3,397,000 – 9 months ended
11/30/2005 – $1,059,000 – 3 months ended
11/30/2005 – $14,000 – other research and development costs
11/30/2005 – $7,000 – other research and development costs
Research and development costs
11/30/2004 – $3,469,000 – 9 months ended
11/30/2004 – $1,085,000 – 3 months ended
Research and development costs
11/30/2002 – $3,028,000 – 9 months ended
Research and development costs
11/30/2002 – $1,067,000 – 3 months ended
11/30/2002 – $6,000 – increase in other research and development costs
8/31/2002 – $1,961,000 – 6 months ended
8/31/2002 – $945,000 – 3 months ended
8/31/2002 – $4,000 – decrease in other research and development costs
8/31/2002 – $4,000 – which were partially offset by increase in other research and development costs
Research and development
5/31/2002 – $1,015,479
Research and development costs
5/31/2002 – $1,015,000 – 3 months ended
5/31/2002 – $10,000 – which were partially offset by increase in other research and development costs
5/31/2002 – $8,000 – increase in other research and development costs
Research and development costs
11/30/2001 – $3,695,000 – 9 months ended
Research and development costs
11/30/2001 – $1,165,000 – 3 months ended
8/31/2001 – $2,530,000 – 6 months ended
8/31/2001 – $1,234,000 – 3 months ended
Research and development
5/31/2001 – $1,296,310
5/31/2001 – $1,296,000 – 3 months ended
Research and development costs
5/31/2001 – $253,000 increase was due to increases in personnel cost
5/31/2001 – 24% increase was due to increases in personnel cost
5/31/2001 – $181,000 – increase
Research and development
5/31/2001 – $6,000 – increase
other research and development costs
5/31/2000 – $1,043,260
5/31/2000 – $1,043,000 – 3 months ended
5/31/2000 – $9,000 – 3 MONTHS ENDED – partially offset by increase in other research and development costs
other research and development costs
5/31/1999 – $1,247,320
5/31/1999 – $1,247,000 – 3 months ended
Total research and development expense
1997 – $993,947
1997 – $993,947 – for year ending
8/31/1997 – $364,000 – 6 months ended
Total research and development expense
1996 -$461,094
1996 – $461,094 – for year ending
net operating loss carryforwards expire as follows:
Year ending
2/28/
or
2/29/
2029 – Company minimum tax credit 2/28/2010
2028 – $722
2027 – $31,219
2026 – $47,083
2025 – $13,732
2024 – $59,706
2023 – $75,450
2022 – $19,315
2021 – $24,117
2020 – $49,976
2018 – $50,786
2017 – $511,871
2016 – $11,818
2013 – $261,184
1998 research and development plan calls for $700,000 development costs
Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog 