Gorski wants to play in the kitchen, but he can’t take the heat
2/18/2013, Gorski posted his 1st book report on Hannah Bradley
Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s cancer “success” stories [1]
The year 2012 was rung out and the year 2013 was rung in by news that “Orac” Check-My-Facts-Hack, propagandist for “brave maverick doctor” Dr. David H. Gorski, who claims that sugar doesn’t feed cancer [2], is releasing a sequel to his wildly successful hackumentary (in “The Skeptics™” underground, that is) “How Stanislaw Burzynski became Burzynski the Brave Maverick Doctor, part 1” [3] 😃
In fact, the sequel is coming out on BFD (Blogs For Dummies) on …, well …, just any day now ! 😳
I somehow doubt that GorsKon will send me a screener BFD to review, but I did review the 4 blogettes he posted on Science Based Medicine; home of: “Our only goal is to promote high standards of science in medicine” [4], and National Geographic’s (#NatGeo) Science blogs, because it easily falls into a genre that I like to refer to as medical propaganda posts, which are almost always made in support of dubious blogs re medical treatments 😊
Gorhac’s mostly lame jokes about proposed titles aside (e.g., Burzynski II:” “Pathetic Googleloo, Burzynski II:” This Time It’s Pee-Reviewed, or even Burzynski II: FAQ Harder), it’s very clear that in the wake of his decision to drop his “[I]f I had screwed up, I would have admitted it” [5] claim re Burzynski on a technicality, and his very own spin doctor named “BOrac, are planning on a huge publicity blitz, in which @gorskon will be portrayed as, yes, a “brave maverick doctor” whom “They” (as in the BPG (Burzynski Patient Group), 3’s company, and the Don’t Mess with Texas Board of Education, a.k.a “DJT”) tried to keep down but failed because he has The Natural Cure For Rancor “Two Turntables and a Mr. Microphone” 😝
I come back to this again because Gorac’s strategy for Burzynski II, as I pointed out, is going to involve “conversion stories” of “The Skeptics™” who didn’t believe in @oracknows magic “[I]f I had screwed up, I would have admitted it”, but do now, after Bob ‘n Weave Blaskiewicz proclaimed during the 9/28/2013 “Burzynski Discussion” Google+ Hangout: “I think that professionally he would make, he he he would follow-up on these things” (2:01:00) [6], claims that he’s 75% sure of the identity of someone who has been critical of his work (like me) [7], and, of course, sucky stories 😜
“DOHrac’s” 4 posts consists of four elements:
Bias, MisDisInformation, (anecdotes), including “EOrac’s” “sucky stories”, contrasted with a rehash of “conspiracy theories” from his “review” of the first movie about the “cancer destablishment” trying to suppress common sense with pseudononsense 😄
Never mind that, even if he were FDA-approved, he would be in the same class as “The Skeptics™” that are disdained on social media as being more for hyper-“bull” than anything else because they have been giving B.S. for a long time ☺
He states: “One notes that Burzynski’s protocol requires at least 18 months of near-continuous infusion of high doses of his antineoplastons“
Does Gorski provide any citation(s), reference(s), and / or link(s) to support his claim ?
no
“mOResmACk” reminds me of Pink
That would be the Pink in Pink Floyd, singing: “We don’t need no edumacation”, because he’s like the churlish schoolboy so intent on getting on to make his 2nd mud pie, that he pulls a wanker on the 1st one
Maybe he should learn how to do real “cancer research” like I posted 8/21/2013 [8]
——————————————————————
10/2004 (Pg. 384)
4.3 months – median duration of administration
——————————————————————
11/2010 (Pg. iv72)
4.4 months – median duration of treatment
——————————————————————
10/2006 (Pg. 466)
4 1/2 months – median duration of i.v. ANP
——————————————————————
3/2006 (Pg. 40)
5 months – median duration of antineoplaston administration
——————————————————————
10/2004 (Pg. 428)
5.2 months – administered median
——————————————————————
12/2009 (Pg. 951)
5.4 months – median duration of treatment (ST)
——————————————————————
12/2009 (Pg. 951)
5.6 months – median duration of treatment (SE)
——————————————————————
10/2004 (Pg. 427)
5.7 months – average duration of ANP
——————————————————————
10/2008 (Pg. 821)
5.7 months – median duration of treatment
——————————————————————
2003 (Pgs. 91 + 96)
6 months – median duration of treatment
——————————————————————
12/2008 (Pg. 1067)
6.5 months – median duration of treatment
——————————————————————
10/2003 (Pg. 358)
9.5 months – median duration of IV ANP
——————————————————————
7/2005 (Pg. 300)
9 1/2 months – median duration of administration
——————————————————————
2004 (Pgs. 315 + 320)
16 months (1 year 4 months) average duration of intravenous ANP
——————————————————————
6/2008 (Pg. 450)
16.5 months (1 year 4.5 months) – median
——————————————————————
2004 (Pg. 320)
19 months – average duration of oral ANP
——————————————————————
6/2005 (Pgs. 168 + 170)
20 months (1 year 8 months) administered average duration
——————————————————————
10/2003 (Pg. 358)
28.6 months (2 years 4.6 months) – median duration of po ANP
After obtaining at least minor response (SD), the treatment continued with po ANP
——————————————————————
9/2004 (Pg. 257)
655 consecutive days – administration of antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 with the exception of a few short interruptions
——————————————————————
Gorski continues:
“Attacks on skeptics and critics of Burzynski“
“If you don’t believe me, just read question #12 in Merola’s FAQ, in which he states,
“You will notice the ‘anti-Burzynski’ bloggers refuse to do that or adhere to reputable sources”
——————————————————————
Gorski, you did NOT even provide any “source” for your “claim” that:
” … Burzynski’s protocol requires at least 18 months of near-continuous infusion of high doses of his antineoplastons“
——————————————————————
Gorski adds:
“You might say, they are preying on desperate cancer patients and families of cancer patients by carelessly misleading their readers about Burzynski and his invention.””
——————————————————————
Gorski, let’s check and see where else YOU are “carelessly misleading” your “readers”
One marvels at your amazing level of protestation ッ
However, every movie needs a villain, and it doesn’t take “sidekick” abilities to guess why
“The Skeptics™” are portrayed as villains
——————————————————————
Gorski gratuitously gabs on:
“Merola also direly accuses and threatens,
“In the worst case scenarios, some bloggers intentionally publish fabricated information to their readers in an attempt to curb new patients from going to the Burzynski Clinic“
“I can hardly wait”
——————————————————————
Gorski, did you mean to “intentionally publish fabricated information” ? 😮
——————————————————————
“Neither can, I bet, a fair number of lawyers“
——————————————————————
Gorski, who’s your lawyer ?
——————————————————————
Gorski plods onward:
“An attempt to reframe Burzynski’s enormous bills for his antineoplaston therapy and criticism that he’s making clinical trial subjects pay to be in his clinical trials”
——————————————————————
Gorski, BITE ME 🙂
Does Gorski provide any citation(s), reference(s), and / or link(s) to support his claim ?
No
——————————————————————
hospital wanted $30,000 deposit
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-16/politics/health.care.hearing_1_health-insurance-post-claims-underwriting-individual-health?_s=PM:POLITICS
——————————————————————
2008 – Avastin – advanced lung, colon or breast cancer
can reach $100,000 year
$50,000 year – adds 4 months of life
“There is a shocking disparity between value and price,” he said, “and it’s not sustainable.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/health/06avastin.html?_r=0
——————————————————————
Cost cancer chemo up-front: $45,000 to Come In
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120934207044648511.html?mod=2_1566_topbox#articleTabs%3Darticle
——————————————————————
3/2012 – Total Cost of Cancer Care by Site of Service: Physician Office vs Outpatient Hospital (22 pages)
Click to access Cost_of_Care.pdf
——————————————————————
CHEMOTHERAPY: 9/24/2012 – hospitals routinely marking up prices on cancer drugs 2 to 10 times over cost
Some markups far higher
nearly $4,500 for 240-milligram dose of irinotecan to treat colon or rectal cancer
average sales price: less than $60
about $19,000 1-gram dose of rituximab to treat lymphoma and leukemia
roughly 3 times average sales price
about $680 50 milligrams of cisplatin
markup: more than 50 times average sales price
Avastin, about $90,000 a year
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/09/24/3549634/prices-soar-as-hospitals-dominate.html
——————————————————————
5/14/2012 – Oral anti-cancer medications generally considered pharmacy benefit
Instead of co-payment plan members often pay % of cost — up to 50% in some cases — with no annual out-of-pocket limit
drugs expensive often costing 10s of 1,000s of $s a year
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-05-14/national/35457286_1_lung-cancer-drug-drugs-work-multiple-myeloma-patients
——————————————————————
RADIATION: 1/4/2013 – new study most comprehensive cost analysis ever, compared costs and outcomes associated with various types of treatment for all forms of disease, ranged from $19,901 for robot-assisted prostatectomy to treat low-risk disease, $50,276 for combined radiation therapy for high-risk disease
http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2013/01/13370/how-prostate-cancer-therapies-compare-cost-and-effectiveness
——————————————————————
3/15/2012 – Using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data, 26,163 women with localized breast cancer had undergone surgery and radiation 2001 to 2005
found Medicare billing for IMRT increased 0.9% diagnosed 2001 to 11.2% diagnosed 2005
average cost radiation treatment during 1st year $7,179 for non-IMRT
$15,230 with IMRT
billing for IMRT more than 5 times higher in regions across nation where local Medicare coverage determinations favorable to IMRT compared to regions where unfavorable
NICE evaluated sorafenib (Nexavar) for kidney cancer, determined had value, but not $80,000 per year’s worth
agency said would reimburse 1/3rd total cost, and if co wants to market product to 60 million British citizens, need to be price flexible,”
http://www.ascopost.com/issues/march-15-2012/rising-costs-in-radiation-oncology-linked-to-medicare-coverage.aspx
——————————————————————
Gorski raves on:
“The new claim is that Burzynski isn’t making patients pay for his antineoplastons (see question #13 in Merola’s FAQ), just for “clinical management” (as if that weren’t incredibly transparent) Vindication”
——————————————————————
Gorski, “NEW CLAIM” ?
2/4/2013 my post #180 on YOUR blog addressed this “new claim” by referencing a 3/12/1996 note before you posted your article 2/18/2013 [9]
——————————————————————
3/12/1996: 2nd – 4th paragraphs (2/4/2013 post #180)
——————————————————————
——————————————————————
Gorski, makes an excuse:
“The last time I discussed Merola’s forthcoming movie, I mentioned that he had contacted me in December and asked me to appear as a Burzynski critic“
“After consultation with skeptics with more media savvy than I, not to mention the PR department at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute (whom I thought it wise to give fair warning that one of their faculty might be featured as evil incarnate in a new documentary and to give the background on what it’s all about, in case there were press inquiries), I politely declined“
——————————————————————
Gorski is like fetid HOT AIR, all words and NO action
——————————————————————
Gorski fumes:
“While going on and on about how he thinks most of us have “good motives” and how we want to be the white knight riding in to save patients from quackery (a desire he somehow manages to convey with clear dismissiveness and contempt), Merola turns immediately around to claim that we don’t know what we’re talking about and we don’t read the literature“
——————————————————————
Gorski, YOU really “don’t know what” you’re “talking about” and I’m just getting warmed up 🙂
——————————————————————
Gorski has smoke coming out his ears:
“This, of course, is complete nonsense, as I’ve read many of Burzynski’s papers (such as they are), delved into ClinicalTrials.gov to look at his clinical trials, examined the plausibility of his claims from a scientific standpoint, and examined the literature from others, both on antineoplastons and related topics”
“I’ve dissected Burzynski’s claims for antineoplastons based on science, assessed his “personalized, gene-targeted cancer therapy” claims and found them wanting, and pointed out how what he is peddling isn’t really anything new at all (more on that later), all based on my knowledge, skills, and understanding of cancer as a breast cancer surgeon and researcher”
“No doubt that’s why Merola needs to discredit me“
——————————————————————
Gorski, Eric Merola does NOT need “to discredit” you
YOU have already done a yeoman’s job of discrediting yourself [10] 🙂
——————————————————————
Gorski posits:
“Other bloggers who have been critical of Burzynski might or might not have my scientific background, but they’ve delved just as deeply into his claims and the evidence for them, and, as I have, they’ve found them highly overinflated and largely not based in science”
——————————————————————
Gorski, unfortunately, is NOT able to name these “[o]ther bloggers”
——————————————————————
Gorski deposits:
“They’ve also taken on aspects of the Burzynski phenomenon, such what I consider to be his questionable ethics and finding out what happened to a lot of patients who trusted Burzynski, far better than I have”
“Merola’s dismissal of Burzynski’s critics is, quite frankly, insulting to them and to me.”
——————————————————————
Gorski fails to mention the very “questionable ethics” of his intrepid research bud Bob [11]
——————————————————————
Gorski rants:
“I don’t know what sort of attacks on the UK bloggers who produce the bulk of the skeptical blog posts about Burzynski are coming in Burzynski II, but when it comes to me no doubt Merola is referring to this bit of yellow journalism in 2010 from an antivaccine propagandist named Jake Crosby, entitled David Gorski’s Financial Pharma Ties:”
“What He Didn’t Tell You”
——————————————————————
Does Gorski provide any citation(s), reference(s), and / or link(s) to support his claim that it’s:
“UK bloggers who produce the bulk of the skeptical blog posts about Burzynski” ?
“What He Didn’t Tell You” ?
NO
——————————————————————
Gorski blots:
“Predictable and tiresome attacks aside, Pete and Hannah’s video made me curious about the specific success stories that Merola will focus on as “proof” that Burzynski is on to something; so I decided I should look into their stories”
“On the surface to those not familiar with cancer they do look like success stories”
“If one digs deeper, the true story is a lot murkier”
——————————————————————
Doctor “G” omits, that once “one digs deeper”, HIS “story is a lot murkier”
——————————————————————
Gorski A.D.D.s:
“More importantly, as I will show, even if they really are success stories—which is not at all clear—they do not constitute convincing evidence of the general efficacy of Burzynski’s antineoplastons, nor do they justify what I consider to be Burzynski’s highly unethical behavior.”
——————————————————————
More importantly, as I will show, is what I consider to be Gorski’s highly unethical behavior
——————————————————————
Gorski flails away:
“I will start with Hannah Bradley’s story because I’ve watched the entire 40 minute video Hannah’s Anecdote (whose title is even more appropriate than perhaps Pete Cohen imagined when he made it)”
“The documentary ends triumphantly several months after the events portrayed during the bulk of the film with Hannah apparently having had a complete response to Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy:”
——————————————————————
Let me just first say something before I begin my usual analysis
I love these reviews 😘
I really do
Yes, it’s true that GorsGeek can be a bit annoying with his seeming desire to validate everything he flogs about some perceived “offender,”as being applicable to him, but I want GorskGeek and “HOrac” to be able to live a long and full life together, growing old in each other’s company
I really do
In fact, I’d love to hang with these two and maybe buy them a pint or two at their local pub (except that it’s pointed out multiple times that GOrackGeek should no longer drink alcohol)
Maybe that’s part of his problem
“Drunky Blogging”
——————————————————————
Gorski pontificates:
“Such is not my intent, but what are skeptics supposed to do?”
“Shy away from undertaking a dispassionate analysis of patient anecdotes used to promote dubious cancer therapies for fear of what patients will say?”
——————————————————————
Gorski, it might actually help IF you knew how to do a proper “dispassionate analysis” 😐
——————————————————————
Gorski cites from the Team Hannah blog
“Hannah’s treatment options are very limited and her life expectancy is for this type of tumour is normally around 18 months and this is why I started a mission to find people who had the same condition and are still alive today”
“I managed to track down a number of these people to speak to them.”
“In his movie, Pete points out that these people all led back to Burzynski“
Gorski interjects:
“Of course, as I’ve said before, dead patients don’t produce testimonials for alternative cancer cures“
——————————————————————
One wonders why Gorski even makes this comment as the number of patients Pete contacted re Burzynski’s “alternative cancer” cure, were obviously NOT dead 😮
——————————————————————
Gorski segues on to:
“Not long after they appear at the Burzynski Clinic, they meet with doctors there who tell them that Hannah’s most recent MRI scan showed progression of her tumor (around 8:30 in the movie)”
“Now, I’m not a radiologist, much less a neuroradiologist, but I wondered at all the enhancement on the superficial area of the brain, just under where her neurosurgeon must have raised the bone flap to remove what he could of the tumor“
“One wonders if much of the remaining enhancement could be still post-surgical and post-radiation change“
“Certainly, the tumor is cystic-appearing, and after surgery such cysts would likely shrink and be reabsorbed even if the tumor were to keep growing”
——————————————————————
Gorski, if you were NOT in a such a rush to post your blog article “ad homineming” Josh Duhamel, you could have taken the time to do proper “cancer research” and maybe listen to the 9/24/2012 @YouTube video of Pete Cohen talking with Neurosurgeon (Consultant) Juan F. Martinez-Canca (20:31)
After all, HE is an actual NEUROSURGEON
——————————————————————
——————————————————————
Or you could read the transcript I made of the video [12]
——————————————————————
Or you could have contacted him and asked questions
http://www.neurokonsilia.com/About-Us.html
——————————————————————
Gorski tangents:
“Be that as it may, there were a number of things I found very interesting in this video”
“First, I notice that nowhere was there anything mentioned about enrolling Hannah on a clinical trial“
——————————————————————
Gorski, if you had let Hannah know you were going to do your article about her, she might have churned her 4/4/2013 article out faster
just for you, where she advises:
“Luckily I was able to take part in a phase 2 clinical trial in Texas, USA” [13]
——————————————————————
Gorski stupefies:
“Given what a thorough videographer Pete obviously is, I find this omission very curious”
“Certainly, given how much detail he’s used in this video and in his vlogs I’d expect that if the subject of clinical trials was mentioned he would have included it”
——————————————————————
Gorski, if you were NOT so busy “getting the popcorn” as you “watched the entire 40 minute video Hannah’s Anecdote”, you might have actually noticed at (7:14):
——————————————————————
12/12/2011 – Day 2 – Monday
Meeting with Dr. Yi and Dr. Greg Burzynski at Burzynski Clinic
——————————————————————
Dr. Greg Burzynski – “We have permission to start you on the antineoplastons”
“Mhmm”
Dr. Greg Burzynski – “which as you know are in the final stages of drug approval”
“Yeah”
Dr. Greg Burzynski – “Dr. Yi is the oncologist on this case”
——————————————————————
Gorski, did you SEE THAT ?
An ONCOLOGIST at the Burzynski Clinic, working with Burzynski
(No wonder you left that out !)
——————————————————————
Gorski ejects:
“The other thing that struck me was just how much Burzynski is full of it when he advertises antineoplastons as not being chemotherapy and, more importantly, as being nontoxic“
“At least a third of the video consisted of the difficulties that Hannah had with her treatment, including high fevers, a trip to the emergency room, and multiple times when the antineoplaston treatment was stopped“
“She routinely developed fevers to 102° F, and in one scene her fever reached 103.9° F“
“She felt miserable, nauseated and weak“
“I’ve seen chemotherapy patients suffer less”
——————————————————————
Gorski whines:
“I’ve seen chemotherapy patients suffer less”, but this is purely “anecdotal”
“At least a third of the video consisted of the difficulties that Hannah had with her treatment”
Let’s do the math, shall we ?
——————————————————————
In America (48 days)
12/11/2011 (Sunday) – 1/27/2012 (Friday)
[4:52 – 35:43]
——————————————————————
Burzynski Clinic 47 days – (7 weeks)
12/12/2011 (Monday) – 1/26/2012 (Thursday)
[5:37 – 35:43]
——————————————————————
12/13/2011 (Tuesday) Day 3
after catheter – Hickman line surgery
(painful / really painful)
[10:30]
——————————————————————
12/14/2011 (Wednesday) Day 4
(feeling wrecked / absolutely wrecked)
[10:52]
——————————————————————
12/24/2011 (Saturday) Day 14
fever
bad breathing
uncontrollable chills couldn’t stop shivering all Saturday night
[18:10]
——————————————————————
12/25/2011 (Sunday) Day 15
fever
flu symptoms
bad breathing
headache
in bed
absolutely exhausted
little bit of swelling back of head
[18:10]
——————————————————————
12/27/2011 (Tuesday) Day 17
temp 102
temp down / up
[19:04]
——————————————————————
12/28/2011 (Wednesday) Day 18
exhausted
close to breaking / cracking
[19:04]
——————————————————————
12/29/2011 (Thursday) Day 19
hospital – E.R.
“I’m at my wits end”
“I don’t feel I can take anymore”
[20:07]
——————————————————————
12/30/2011 (Friday) Day 20
last week up & down
fever
chills
shaking
viral infection
bacterial infection
had to go to E.R.
[20:22]
——————————————————————
12/31/2011 (Saturday) Day 21
fever in middle of night
flu-like symptoms
temp 102
[21:53]
——————————————————————
1/1/2012 (Sunday) Day 22
feel drunky
felt like completely drunk
double vision
Nurse said anti-seizure drug she hadn’t taken before
bit shaky
[22:34]
——————————————————————
1/15/2012 (Sunday) Day 36
antibiotics 1st day
[24:33]
——————————————————————
1/16/2012 (Monday) Day 37
over 102 Monday night
antibiotics 2nd day
[25:24]
——————————————————————
1/17/2012 (Tuesday) Day 38
fever
temp 101.8
throat infection
antibiotics been on 3 days
[25:24]
——————————————————————
1/20/2012 (Friday) Day 41
fever 104 (103.9) Friday night
[26:54]
——————————————————————
1/21/2012 (Saturday) Day 42
temp up to 104 (103.9)
Dr. on-call – Ibuprofen
102.5
yesterday afternoon (blood) rash ?
[27:50]
——————————————————————
1/23/2012 (Monday) Day 44
some itch
[28:35]
======================================
47 days – Burzynski Clinic
31 days – treatment NOT mentioned
16 days – treatment mentioned
======================================
12/25/2011 (Sunday) Day 15
off ANP
[18:10]
——————————————————————
12/27/2011 (Tuesday) Day 17
back on ANP
off ANP – temp 102
temp down / up
[19:04]
——————————————————————
12/28/2011 (Wednesday) Day 18
on ANP much smaller dose
[19:04]
——————————————————————
12/29/2011 (Thursday) Day 19
hospital – E.R.
[20:07]
——————————————————————
12/30/2011 (Friday) Day 20
last week up & down
off on off on off ANP
[20:22]
——————————————————————
12/31/2011 (Saturday) Day 21
temp 102
[21:53]
——————————————————————
1/15/2012 (Sunday) Day 36
antibiotics 1st day
[24:33]
——————————————————————
1/16/2012 (Monday) Day 37
over 102 Monday night
antibiotics 2nd day
[25:24]
——————————————————————
1/17/2012 (Tuesday) Day 38
temp 101.8
off ANP (If 102 take off ANP)
antibiotics been on 3 days
[25:24]
——————————————————————
1/20/2012 (Friday) Day 41
fever 104 (103.9) Friday night
[26:54]
——————————————————————
1/21/2012 (Saturday) Day 42
off ANP – temp up to 104 (103.9)
102.5
[27:50]
======================================
5 – off ANP
May have been off ANP 5 to 6 days out of 47 ?
======================================
12/27/2011 (Tuesday) Day 17
temp 102
temp down / up
[19:04]
——————————————————————
12/29/2011 (Thursday) Day 19
hospital – E.R.
[20:07]
——————————————————————
12/31/2011 (Saturday) Day 21
temp 102 – in middle of night
[21:53]
——————————————————————
1/16/2012 (Monday) Day 37
temp over 102 Monday night
antibiotics 2nd day
[25:24]
——————————————————————
1/17/2012 (Tuesday) Day 38
temp 101.8
antibiotics been on 3 days
[25:24]
——————————————————————
1/20/2012 (Friday) Day 41
temp 104 (103.9) Friday night
[26:54]
——————————————————————
1/21/2012 (Saturday) Day 42
102.5
[27:50]
======================================
6 days – temperature mentioned
temp 102 – temp down / up – 12/27/2011
102 in middle of night – 12/31/2011
102+ Monday night – 1/16/2012
temp 101.8 – 1/17/2012
104 (103.9) Friday night – 1/20/2012
102.5 – 1/21/2012
======================================
Gorski scatterbrains on:
“I was also very puzzled at how the Burzynski Clinic could allow a cancer patient to linger with a fever of 102° F and sometimes higher, accompanied by shaking chills, in a temporary lodging without admitting her to the hospital“
——————————————————————
Does Gorski provide any citation(s), reference(s), and / or link(s) to support his claim ?
no !
——————————————————————
http://my.clevelandclinic.org/symptoms/fever/hic_fever.aspx
——————————————————————
Gorski complains:
“It’s not clear what sort of workup was done to evaluate Hannah either, what her white blood cell count was, or what her other labs were“
“Did they draw blood cultures?”
“Did they get urinalyses and cultures?”
“Did they do chest X-rays to rule out pneumonia?”
——————————————————————
Gorski, maybe you should have asked Wayne Dolcefino
Or maybe you should have gone to the Burzynski Clinic
Oh, wait
You think you know everything and could NOT learn anything by going there 😅
——————————————————————
Gorski at least gets one thing correct:
“It’s all very unclear, other than that she apparently was given some antibiotics at some point”
——————————————————————
1/15/2012 Monday Day 36
antibiotics 1st day
——————————————————————
1/16/2012 Tuesday Day 37
antibiotics 2nd day
——————————————————————
1/17/2012 (Tuesday) Day 38
antibiotics been on 3 days
——————————————————————
Gorski wonders:
“Did she have the flu, given her flu-like symptoms, or was this due to her antineoplaston therapy?“
——————————————————————
Gorski, why not “speculate” like “The Skeptics™” usually do ?
——————————————————————
12/24/2011 (Saturday) Day 14
fever
bad breathing
shivering all night
——————————————————————
12/25/2011 (Sunday) Day 15
flu symptoms
breathing
headache
uncontrollable chills couldn’t stop
off ANP
absolutely exhausted
in bed
little bit of swelling back of head
——————————————————————
12/27/2011 (Tuesday) Day 17
back on ANP
temp 102 – off ANP
temp down / up
——————————————————————
12/28/2011 (Wednesday) Day 18
on ANP much smaller dose
exhausted – close to breaking / cracking
——————————————————————
12/29/2011 (Thursday) Day 19
hospital – E.R.
——————————————————————
12/30/2011 (Friday) Day 20
last week up & down
off on off on off
fever
chills
shaking
viral infection
bacterial infection
——————————————————————
12/31/2011 (Saturday) Day 21
temp 102 – fever in middle of night
Dr. SRB thinks flu-like symptoms or tumor actually breaking down
——————————————————————
1/16/2012 (Monday) Day 37
temp 102+ Monday night
——————————————————————
1/17/2012 (Tuesday) Day 38
throat infection
temp 101.8 – fever – off ANP
antibiotics been on 3 days
——————————————————————
1/20/2012 (Friday) Day 41
104 (103.9) – fever – Friday night
——————————————————————
1/21/2012 (Saturday) Day 42
temp up to 104
Dr. on-call – Ibuprofen
102.5 – off ANP
yesterday afternoon rash
——————————————————————
Gorski ponders:
“The reaction of the clinic staff (i.e., rather blasé, even though at one point Hannah clearly demonstrates a change in mental status, appearing “drunk” and complaining of double-vision) made me wonder if this sort of problem was a common occurrence”
——————————————————————
Gorski, what’s the matter ?
Did you grab another handful of popcorn ?
——————————————————————
1/1/2012 (Sunday) Day 22 Burzynski Clinic
feel drunky
felt like completely drunk
double vision
bit shaky
Nurse said anti-seizure drug she hadn’t taken before
[22:34]
——————————————————————
Gorski, what are some of the side-effects of “anti-seizure” medications ?
dizziness
double-vision
drowsiness
imbalance
loss of coordination
Problems with motor skills
Problems with tasks requiring sustained performance
nausea
slurred speech
staggering
mental disturbances
serious mood changes
——————————————————————
http://umm.edu/health/medical/reports/articles/epilepsy
——————————————————————
Gorski continues his assault on the popcorn:
“At another point, Pete and Hannah come to believe that the fevers might have been due to the tumor breaking down, which strikes me as implausible”
——————————————————————
Gorski, if it “strikes” you “as implausible”, then why did you ask, above ?
“Did she have the flu, given her flu-like symptoms, or was this due to her antineoplaston therapy?“
——————————————————————
12/31/2011 (Saturday) Day 21
temp 102 – fever in middle of night
Dr. SRB thinks flu-like symptoms OR tumor actually breaking down
[21:53]
——————————————————————
Gorski blunders along:
“Later, she develops an extensive rash“
——————————————————————
1/23/2012 (Monday) Day 44
Pete sent pic to Dr. SRB who gave name from pic and Pete verified
[28:35]
——————————————————————
Gorski bumbles onward:
“It’s difficult to tell for sure what it is at the resolution of the video, but it looks like erythema multiforme, which is generally an allergic rash”
“What’s the most likely cause of such a rash?”
“Guess”
“Erythema multiforme is usually a drug reaction”
——————————————————————
Gorski, what can cause “Erythema multiforme” ?
Anti-seizure medication
——————————————————————
http://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/condition/erythema
——————————————————————
Gorski speculates:
“The question, of course, is:”
“Does this mean that Burzynski’s antineoplaston treatment worked for Hannah?“
“Sadly, the answer is:”
“Not necessarily”
“It might have”
“It might not have”
“Why do I say this?”
“First, she didn’t have much residual disease after surgery and radiotherapy, and in fact it’s hard to tell how much is tumor and how much is postop and radiation effect“
——————————————————————
Gorski, I think it’s safe to say that neurosurgeon Dr. Martinez knows much better than you and your speculation
——————————————————————
Gorski
“Second, the median survival for anaplastic astrocytoma (which is a form of glioma) is around 2 to 3 years, and with different types of radiation therapy five year survival is around 15% or even higher”
——————————————————————
Gorski provides a link to a site which advises [14]:
High-grade tumors grow rapidly and can easily spread through the brain“
High-grade tumors are much more aggressive and require very intensive therapy
All patients with high-grade astrocytomas receive both radiation therapy and chemotherapy regardless of age
Prognosis is poor in this group of patients
——————————————————————
Gorski’s 2nd linked source advises [15]:
These highly aggressive tumors often occur in young adults and typically recur or progress to a grade 4 glioblastoma within several years of diagnosis, despite treatment with surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy
Tumor more resistant to therapy and patients have shorter median survival of only 2 to 3 years
——————————————————————
Gorski’s 3rd link [16] showcases his lame research as one has to read through almost the entire article to find the reference, which directs the reader to yet another publication [17]:
Gorski FAILS to advise the reader that the 2002 study is titled:
“Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) for previously untreated malignant gliomas“
Hannah Bradley’s WAS previously treated
Gorski also FAILS to advise the reader if this study included patients with grade 3 or 4 tumors
——————————————————————
Gorski claims:
“Thus, long term survival for patients with astrocytomas is not so rare that Hannah’s survival is so unlikely that the most reasonable assumption has to be that it was Burzynski’s treatment that saved her”
——————————————————————
Gorski, nice claim, but you did NOT really prove it
——————————————————————
Gorski suspects:
“More likely, Hannah is a fortunate outlier, although it’s hard for me to say even that because, at only two years out from her initial diagnosis, she’s only just reached the lower end of the range of reported median survival times for her disease”
——————————————————————
Gorski, the operative word is “outLIER”
Gorski then goes all “conspiracy theory” about a supposed “cryptic Facebook post”, a “vlog entry no longer exists”, “Hannah and Pete supposedly being “evasive”, “using vague terms”, a “little blip”, and “lack of new scans”
Next, little green “popcorn munchin'” men 👽
——————————————————————
3/4/2013 Gorski drops “conspiracy theory, part II” on an unsuspecting audience [19]:
Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s cancer “success” stories update: Why is the release of the Burzynski sequel being delayed?
It’s no secret that I happen to NOT be on several mailing lists of “The Skeptics™”whose dedication to science is—shall we say?—questionable
As I delved deeper, I learned that Gorski’s evidence for the “questioning” of the anticancer efficacy of “antineoplaston therapy” doesn’t hold up; that his “questioning” of “personalized gene-targeted cancer therapy” is anything but; and that he’s an orphan now in what appears to me to be a strategy to bypass restrictions on his use of proper “cancer research “
The CliffsNotes version for those who don’t want to read Gorsack’s previous lengthy post is that he claims Hannah’s tumor, an astrocytoma (which is a form of glioma) did indeed appear to regress, but that regression can likely be explained by the surgery and radiation therapy that she had
Even then, however, he claims it would not be evidence that the antineoplastons saved her because there are occasional complete remissions in this tumor type, and long term survivors, although uncommon, are not so uncommon that Hannah must be evidence that antineoplastons are so miraculously effective that they saved her when conventional medicine could not
Gorski’s claims are anecdotal, as he failed miserably to provide the necessary citation(s), reference(s), and / or link(s) to support his claims
Gorski claims:
“I try very hard not to cross that line, and I think I’ve been successful, for instance, here”
But I proved again, above, how he fails and fails again with his “amateurish” attempts at proper “cancer research”
Similarly, Gorski realizes that it is very effective to appeal to emotions and cast Burzynski’s as heartless
Gorski inserts other Burzynski patients into his posts about Pete and Hannah
——————————————————————
GORSKI FAIL #1 – “One notes that Burzynski’s protocol requires at least 18 months of near-continuous infusion of high doses of his antineoplastons“
——————————————————————
GORSKI FAIL #2 – “The new claim is that Burzynski isn’t making patients pay for his antineoplastons (see question #13 in Merola’s FAQ), just for “clinical management” (as if that weren’t incredibly transparent) Vindication”
——————————————————————
GORSKI FAIL #3 – “First, I notice that nowhere was there anything mentioned about enrolling Hannah on a clinical trial“
——————————————————————
GORSKI FAIL #4 – “Certainly, given how much detail he’s used in this video and in his vlogs I’d expect that if the subject of clinical trials was mentioned he would have included it“
——————————————————————
GORSKI FAIL #5 – “The reaction of the clinic staff (i.e., rather blasé, even though at one point Hannah clearly demonstrates a change in mental status, appearing “drunk”and complaining of double-vision) made me wonder if this sort of problem was a common occurrence”
——————————————————————
GORSKI FAIL #6 – Well, I could add more … 🙂
——————————————————————
My apologies to the following co-authors if you ever had to check the “cancer research” of one: Gorski D., Gorski DH, D H Gorski,
Alsina J, Banda M, Beckett MA, Bigelow K, Branellec D, Burtch GD, Calvin DP, Campbell DA Jr., Chen Y, Colletti LM, Copeland NG, N G Copeland, Coyne JC, Dedieu JF, Denèfle P, DeVries JA, Dhanabal M, Gabriel EM, Gately S, Germino FJ, Goydos JS, Guo K, Halpern A, Hanna NN, Hari DM, Heimann R, Hellman S, Isner JM, Jaskowiak NT, Jenkins NA, N A Jenkins, Johansen C, Kaur H, Kim HJ, Koons A, Krawetz SA, Kufe DW, Leal AD, Leal AJ., LePage DF, D F LePage, Lincecum J, Mahfoudi A, Mann B, Mao S, Mattingly RR., Mauceri HJ, Mekani T, Merion RM, Pastore C, Patel CV, C V Patel, Patel S, Perlman H, Posner MC, Rabson AB, Salloum RM, Saunders MP, Seetharam S, Shah S, Shih W, Sloane BF, Smith JS, Smith RC, Soff GA, Speyer CL, Staba MJ, Stellato KA, Stratford IJ, Sukhatme VP, Turcotte JG, Walsh K., K Walsh, Weichselbaum RR.
======================================
REFERENCES:
======================================
[1] – 2/18/2013 – Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s cancer “success” stories
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/stanislaw-burzynskis-cancer-success-stories/
======================================
[2] – 4/2/2013 – Critiquing David H. Gorski – Quackademic Medicine:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/critiquing-david-h-gorski-quackademic-medicine/
======================================
[3] – Critiquing: How Stanislaw Burzynski became Burzynski the Brave Maverick Doctor, part 1:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/critiquing-how-stanislaw-burzynski-became-burzynski-the-brave-maverick-doctor-part-1/
======================================
[4] – #ScienceBasedMedicine
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/
======================================
[5] – 10/18/2013 – Deconstructing Dr. David H. (Orac) Gorski – September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/deconstructing-dr-david-h-orac-gorski-september-28-2013-the-skeptics-burzynski-discussion-by-bob-blaskiewicz-21951/
======================================
[6] – September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/04/september-28-2013-the-skeptics-burzynski-discussion-by-bob-blaskiewicz-21951/
======================================
[7] – 5/7/2013 – Critiquing: Is Eric Merola issuing bogus DMCA takedown notices against critics of Stanislaw Burzynski?:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/critiquing-is-eric-merola-issuing-bogus-dmca-takedown-notices-against-critics-of-stanislaw-burzynski/
======================================
[8] – 8/21/2013 – Critiquing David H. Gorski, MD, PhD, FACS http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/david-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/08/21/critiquing-david-h-gorski-md-phd-facs-www-sciencebasedmedicine-orgeditorial-staffdavid-h-gorski-md-phd-managing-editor/
======================================
[9] – 2/4/2013 – Post #180
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/01/21/quoth-joe-mercola-i-love-me-some-burzynski-antineoplastons
======================================
[10] – Gorski articles:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/burzynski-timeline-3/
======================================
[11] – 10/27/2013 – “The Skeptics™” Burzynski Bias, Censorship, Lies, and Alibi’s: September 28, 2013 “The Skeptics™” Burzynski discussion: By Bob Blaskiewicz – 2:19:51
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/27/the-skeptics-lie-lied-lies-liars-lying-burzynski-bias-censorship-lies-and-alibis-september-28-2013-the-skeptics-burzynski-discussion-by-bob-blaskiewic/
======================================
[12] – Hannah Bradley – I Feel Empowered, In Control Of My Body: Four Women On Fighting Cancer With Alternative Therapies: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/10383724/I-feel-empowered-in-control-of-my-body-four-women-on-fighting-cancer-with-alternative-therapies.html
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/hannah-bradley-i-feel-empowered-in-control-of-my-body-four-women-on-fighting-cancer-with-alternative-therapies-httpwww-telegraph-co-ukhealth10383724i-feel-empowered-in-control-of-my-body-fo/
======================================
[13] – “My Brain Tumour Made me Shake to the Core and Look at Life in a Completely Different Light:”
——————————————————————
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/3012836
======================================
[14] – Disease Information
Brain Tumor: Astrocytoma / Glioma
Alternate Names: Anaplastic astrocytoma:
——————————————————————
http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=6f2b061585f70110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD
======================================
[15] – 2009 – Anaplastic Glioma: How to Prognosticate Outcome and Choose a Treatment Strategy:
——————————————————————
http://m.jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/35/5861.full
======================================
[16] – Radiation Therapy for Brain Tumors:
——————————————————————
http://www.texasoncology.com/types-of-cancer/brain-cancer/radiation-therapy-for-brain-tumors/
======================================
[17] – 2002 – [16] Nemoto K, Ogawa Y, Matsushita, H, et al. Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) for previously untreated malignant gliomas. BMC Cancer. 2002;2:1
——————————————————————
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/2/1
======================================
[18] – Team Hannah blog:
——————————————————————
http://www.teamhannah.com/2012/11/01/team-hannah-blog-011112/
======================================
[19] – 3/4/2013 – Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s cancer “success” stories update: Why is the release of the Burzynski sequel being delayed?”
——————————————————————
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/burzynski-success-stories-update-movie-sequel/
======================================
[20] – 3/11/2013 – Two Stanislaw Burzynski’s “success stories”
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/03/11/two-stanislaw-burzynskis-success-stories/
======================================
[21] – 10/22/2013 – Four misleading cancer testimonials and “reverse balance”
——————————————————————
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/10/22/four-misleading-cancer-testimonials-and-reverse-balance/
======================================
——————————————————————
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b021480r
======================================
Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog 