[8] – 1993 (10/26/1993) – Burzynski to Dr. Michael A. Friedman

This page is linked to:
=====================================
Critiquing: Dr. Michael A. Friedman, Dr. Mark G. Malkin, Dr. Mario Sznol, Robert B. Lanman, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), Public Health Service, Quality Assurance and Compliance Section, Regulatory Affairs Branch (RAB), Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), Division of Cancer Treatment (DCT), National Cancer Center (NCI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Stanislaw Burzynski: On the arrogance of ignorance about cancer and targeted therapies
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/critiquing-stanislaw-burzynski-on-the-arrogance-of-ignorance-about-cancer-and-targeted-therapies/
======================================
[8] – 1993 (10/26/1993) – Burzynski to Dr. Michael A. Friedman
——————————————————————
Dear Dr. Friedman,

In response to your letter of 10/20/1993, it is difficult for me to understand why the entire 1st page of your letter is used to discuss the simplest issue:

that adults should use a different dosage than that used for children

Since you agreed to the study procedure of Protocol BT-6 as recommended in my letter of 6/9/1993, we have not requested any changes in the structure of treatment which was accepted by Memorial-Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC)

As you confirmed in your letter of 10/20/1993, you know very well that since 4/1/1993 of this year my recommended dosage of Antineoplaston AS2-1 for adults is 0.4g/kg/24h

Again, I confirmed that this is the right dosage for adults in my letter to Dr. Shoemaker of 8/24/1993

Yet, for no apparent reason, you insist on using in the adult treatment protocol the dosage 0.6g/kg/24h which I recommend for children

It is generally known that a child’s body weight is much lower than that of adults

This should be reflected in the escalation of the dosages

My recommendation as to how to escalate the dosages for adults was submitted to the NCI on 6/4/1992

Yet, for no apparent reason the MSKCC protocol, which is designed for adults, escalates the dosages in the small increments recommended for children

The principle behind dose escalation is to accomplish the maximum dosage in 3 to 5 days, not 3 to 4 weeks, which would expose the patient to the unnecessary risk of tumor progression

I appreciate very much that you have finally decided to follow my recommendation regarding dosage and dosage escalation

Regarding the number of patients to be treated at MSKCC, the contradictory, incomplete, and inconsistent information is being supplied by you

The MSKCC’s protocol of 4/16/1993, 7/13/1993, and 8/30/1993 describe the treatment of 35,

Pg. 2

but not 70 patients

(please see paragraph 12.1, pg. 10 of the protocol, which is attached)

It was our understanding that 35 patients would be treated at MSKCC and at the Mayo Clinic

I never agreed for the treatment of 70 patients at MSKCC

Since I have to produce the medicine for the trial and pay for it, it is vitally important to me to know how many patients will be treated

The treatment of an additional 35 patients may cost up to 2 million dollars

Contrary to the information given by NCI that we received the money for the production of medicine, this money went apparently into a “black hole”

(“Black Holism,” The Village Voice, 7/29/1993, enclosed)

We have received none of the money which the Office of Alternative Medicine gave to the NCI for funding the trials with our medicine

Contrary to the opinion expressed in your letter, we see no reason for modifying Fleming’s Phase II clinical trial design and introducing more stringent than usual criteria for response evaluation

We request that Fleming’s original design be used, which calls for the initial treatment of 15 patients with at least one responder, instead of 20 patients and 2 responders

Given the fact that there is no existing treatment effective in this type of cancer, one responder in 15 is certainly significant and would be reason enough to expand the trial

I found your your requirement for 14 days to complete scans and laboratory tests prior to treatment very interesting

It is a very well known fact that glioblastoma multiforme is such an active tumor that if 2 weeks elapses from the time of the scan and the beginning of treatment, the tumor may increase by more than 50%

This means that even before the patient begins treatment, he can be classified as an increasing disease case

In most of the hospitals in the U.S., including out tiny clinic, all pretreatment tests including the scans can be done in one day

Therefore, I insist that the pretreatment evaluation, including brain scans, be done within 7 days from the time treatment begins

Regarding the Karnofsky Performance Status (PS), it is unclear to me why you have backed off from your own recommendation in your letter of 5/5/1993 (copy attached) that “patients with Karnofsky PS of below 70% should be excluded”

I am requesting that as recommended by NCI, the patient’s PS should be 70% to 100%

I agree that both scan data and neurological assessment can be described in the analysis of response, but the decision of how to classify response should be based on tumor measurements alone

All of these patients will have been extensively treated before

As the result of previous neurotoxic treatments, a number of these patients will deteriorate neurologically even if the Antineoplastons eradicate the

Pg. 3

tumor

The purpose of the protocol is to evaluate the antitumor effect, not to prove that Antineoplastons can repair brain damage resulting from chemotherapy and radiation

In this 1st independent study with Antineoplastons, in order to assure that patients will derive the most benefit from the treatment, it is critically important to schedule more frequent evaluations of the data than waiting until after the accrual of 14 patients, i.e. waiting 9 months

(Based on an accrual of 2 patients per month, if we wait until 14 patients are accrued and treated, 9 months will pass before the 1st evaluation takes place)

Therefore, I request that reviews of the studies be performed after the treatment of each group of 5 patients, i.e. after 6 months

I agree, however, that you will provide the Theradex printout to us as you receive it

In addition to patient welfare, there is another reason for more frequent patient evaluations

As you stated in your letter, I have no doubt that the investigators at MSKCC have extensive experience treating glioma

However, MSKCC is known to be biased against Antineoplastons

At least 3 researchers associated with MSKCC published willful misrepresentations and distortions about Antineoplaston research

Because of the controversial nature of the upcoming Antineoplaston clinical trials, it is essential that they are conducted in a manner beyond any suspicion of bias

Contrary to the opinion expressed in your letter, NCI is responsible for the trial’s delay

As you well know, the NCI selected an MSKCC investigator in 9/1992

In spite of our repeated requests, 8 months were waisted before the NCI produced the 1st draft of the protocol

As promised in my letter to you of 11/11/1992, the supply of Antineoplastons has been prepared and was shown to Ms. Mary McCabe of NCI during the site visit on 2/9/1993

The medicine was ready to be released pending final approval approval of the labels by the FDA and our final QC inspection

The medicine will be sent to you immediately once you make the corrections to the protocol that we have requested

Since you mentioned that patient recruitment has begun already, I would be glad to accept these patients immediately under my care and offer them free medicine as we wait for the protocol to be revised and the treatment at MSKCC to begin

The MSKCC protocol in its current form would threaten the welfare of these patients

In your letter you stated that your mission is to find and develop better therapies for cancer patients, and that your only obligation is to those patients

However, the way

Pg. 4

you proceed leads me to question that for the following reasons:

1) Out of numerous cancer treatment centers, you selected 2:

MSKCC and Mayo Clinic, which are known to be strongly biased against alternative treatments

In the past doctors associated with MSKCC have voiced strong opposition to Antineoplaston therapy and have published articles full of misrepresentations and distortions

2) The protocol approved by you will allow the disease to progress between the pretreatment evaluation and the beginning of treatment

3) Due to the slow escalation of dosages, patients will most likely have marked increase of tumor size beginning the treatment at the correct dosage level

4) In spite of my numerous requests (letters of 4/29/1993, 6/9/1993, and 8/24/1993) to proceed following the guidelines of the NCI’s Decision Network on 12/2/1991 to have a separate clinical trial for glioblastoma multiforme and anaplastic astrocytoma, you continue to combine both types of tumors together

Even in your most recent stratification strategy submitted to the FDA, you are planning to treat initially 20 patients without specifying whether those 20 patients are per each stratum (glioblastoma vs. anaplastic astrocytoma), or whether this initial group of 20 patients consist of a mixture of glioblastoma and anaplastic astrocytoma

If the latter is the case, then we can expect that among these 1st 20 patients, most will have glioblastoma, which is more common and more difficult to treat

In case of treatment failure in these 20 patients, it will be easy to make the statement that Antineoplastons do not have therapeutic effect in both tumor categories

5) The protocol now states in paragraph 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 that the objective decrease of tumor size is not enough to be considered a true response to treatment, that there must also be improvement in neurological function

As I explained in my letter of 10/13/1993 to Dr. Greenblatt, it is not unusual in my practice to see patients whose tumor has disappeared, but who have deteriorated neurologically as the result of delayed toxicity from radiation therapy and chemotherapy

Since these patients in the MSKCC study have been pretreated, and since there has been no indication that anything, including Antineoplastons, can repair brain damage caused by chemotherapy and radiation, I request that the criteria including restored neurological functioning be removed from paragraphs 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 of the protocol

Pg, 5

6) Finally, by limiting our access to the data and not allowing review until after the 1st 14 patients have been treated, it would be easy to deviate from the protocol and supply inadequate treatment, and then claim that due to the the failure of the 1st 14 patients it would be a waste of the taxpayers money to proceed with further treatment

Your final statements that you are ready to proceed with the treatment with Antineoplastons without our participation caught me by surprise

It is hard to imagine that a Federal employee would consider patent infringement, thus infringing on the patent rights of thousands of our shareholders

Once again, I urge you to take our requests seriously, honor the guidelines of the NCI’s Decision Network on 12/2/1991, and make proper corrections to the protocol, so that objective clinical studies can begin immediately

In the meantime, I would be glad to treat for free all the patients presently recruited, and will submit progress reports weekly for the NCI’s review and evaluation

SRB/cf

cc:

Senator Joseph Biden
Senator Barbara Boxer
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Senator Tom Harkin
Senator Barbara Mikulski
Congressman Berkley Bedell
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
Dr. Samuel Broder
Dr. Jan Buckner
Dr. Bruce Chabner
Dr. Daniel Eskinazi
Dr. Jay Greenblatt
Dr. Joseph Jacobs
Dr. Mark Malkin
Ms. Mary McCabe
Dr. David Parkinson
Dr. Mario Sznol
Ms. Dorothy Tisevich
======================================

======================================
1993 (10/26/1993) – SRB to [5]
1993 (10/26/1993) – SRB to [14]
1991 (12/2/1991) – guidelines of the NCI’s Decision Network [5 Pgs.]
1992 (6/4/1992) Burzynski to NCI
1992 (9/1992) – NCI selected MSKCC investigator
1992 (11/11/1992) – Burzynski to Dr. Michael A. Friedman
1993 (2/9/1993) – NCI Mary McCabe site visit
1993 (4/1/1993) –
1993 (4/16/1993) – MSKCC protocol
1993 (4/29/1993) – Burzynski to
to proceed following the guidelines of the NCI’s Decision Network on 12/2/1991
1993 (5/5/1993) – Dr. Michael A. Friedman to Burzynski
1993 (6/9/1993) – Burzynski to
to proceed following the guidelines of the NCI’s Decision Network on 12/2/1991
1993 (7/13/1993) – MSKCC protocol
1993 (7/29/1993) – “Black Holism,” The Village Voice
1993 (8/24/1993) – Burzynski to Dr. Dale Shoemaker
to proceed following the guidelines of the NCI’s Decision Network on 12/2/1991
1993 (8/30/1993) – MSKCC protocol
1993 (10/20/1993) – Dr. Michael A. Friedman to Burzynski
======================================

Advertisements

A Critical Analysis of Wikipedia’s “Failure to Communicate”

======================================
[1] – 1st 7 comments by
“The Skeptics™”

======================================
34 – # of “The Skeptics™”
======================================
29 – # Questioning “The Skeptics™”
======================================
192 comments – “The Skeptics™”
——————————————————————
44 – Lynne Batik
31 – Fenwicke Bootzin (Sizzling Bacon Scent) Sizzling Burnt Bacon Scent
13 – Robert (Bobby) Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz)
13 – Adam Jacobs (@DianthusMed)
12 – Jen Abe
10 – David H. Gorski (@gorskon @oracknows @ScienceBasedMed)
7 – Edward Jenner
6 – Guy Chapman (@SkepticGuy)
6 – Fred Hamlet
6 – Rene F. Najera
6 – Darren Woodward (Sebastian Armstrong @spikesandspokes on Twitter)
4 – Angela Campagna
4 – Val Perry Rendel
3 – Amy Hochberg Beaton
3 – Susan Scotvold Goodstein
3 – Karl Mamer
2 – Scott Hurst
2 – Laura Calise Neimeyer
2 – Tsu Dho Nimh
1 – Catherina Becker
1 – Vicky Forster
1 – Jan Gosau
1 – David James (@StortSkeptic)
1 – Terry D. Johnson
1 – Jen Keane
1 – Adam Levenstein
1 – Keir Liddle (@endless_psych)
1 – Matthew Miller
1 – Paul Morgan (@DrPaulMorgan)
1 – Richard Murray
1 – Scott Myers
1 – Andy Roseborrough
1 – Footy Stuff
1 – Tom Steinberg

======================================
239 comments – Questioning “The Skeptics™”
——————————————————————
112 – Didymus Thomas *
71 – Robert Davis
15 – Jon Barratt
13 – Eric Merola
7 – Bruce Scherzer
4 – Ben Hymas
2 – Bill Doucette
2 – Teresa Kennett
2 – Krassi Kostova
2 – Jessica Ressel-Doeden
2 – Jennifer Woods
1 – Angela Campagna
1 – Jessica Guillory Garza
1 – Melissa Gilbert
1 – Russell David Humphress
1 – Karl Jobst
1 – Anya Matkowski
1 – Susanne McAllister
1 – Terri Miller
1 – Mark Mord
1 – Shannon E. Peters
1 – Chris Rodriguez
1 – Pat Rozek
1 – Cindy Samora
1 – Ric Schiff
1 – Gary Susie
1 – Kevin Thurston
1 – Laura Vincent
1 – Susan Wassenhove
——————————————————————
* Requesting “The Skeptics™” reply when they did NOT, pointing out where they did NOT provide any citation(s), reference(s), and / or link(s) to support their claims
======================================
38 comments with links – “The Skeptics™”
——————————————————————
19 – Lynne Batik
5 – Fenwicke Bootzin (Sizzling Bacon Scent) Sizzling Burnt Bacon Scent
5 – Adam Jacobs (@DianthusMed)
3 – David H. Gorski (@gorskon @oracknows @ScienceBasedMed)
2 – Fred Hamlet
2 – Rene F. Najera
1 – Robert (Bobby) Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz)
1 – Andy Roseborrough

======================================
131 comments with links – Questioning “The Skeptics™”
——————————————————————
104 – Didymus Thomas *
18 – Robert Davis
8 – Eric Merola
1 – Paul Battista
——————————————————————
* One of “The Skeptics™” made the mistake of commenting that Burzynski, had NOT published any publications
======================================
“The Skeptics™” LIES
——————————————————————
[2] – 3/5/2013 – Adam Jacobs

” … did you know that he’s recently removed all mention of antineoplastons from his website … “
——————————————————————
[3] – 3/5/2013 – William M. London

” … Burzynski’s anti-cancer fantasies … “
——————————————————————
[4] – 3/5/2013 – Paul Morgan

“As for his “gene-targeted” therapy, firstly Burzynski is simply using a cocktail of chemotherapy drugs in a random and haphazard manner with no thoughts as to the potential interactions and unpredictable toxicity of his mix of chemotherapy drugs”

“As for being “gene-targeted”, his approach could be described as “gene-targeted” in the same way as the military regard carpet bombing …”
======================================

======================================
======================================
“The Skeptics™” who got it WRONG
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – Rene F. Najera

“I predict this poll and subsequent comments will be taken down by the end of the day”
——————————————————————
This “Skeptics™” must have had
CPT12
confused with “The Skeptics™” like Robert (Bobby) Blaskiewicz (@rjblaskiewicz), David H. Gorski (@gorskon @oracknows @ScienceBasedMed), Adam Jacobs (@DianthusMed), and Keir Liddle (@endless_psych), who block people on their blogs
======================================
“The Skeptics™” who did NOT provide any citation(s), reference(s), and / or link(s) to support their claims
——————————————————————
3/6/2013 – Lynne Batik

“Dr. B is a scam artist who has found a few people he can claim to have cured, and uses those to sucker in far more people who he will bankrupt without curing”
——————————————————————
3/4/2013 – Amy Hochberg Beaton

“I think Burzynski has proved multiple times over that his $*&% doesn’t work and he is not running a legitimate trial”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – Catherina Becker

“To prey on desperate, dying people, encouraging them to fund raise, risk hundreds of thousands of dollars of debts, for life threatening humbug must be the vilest phenomenon in Medicine”

“To support such behaviour by running adverts for these vultures is equally vile”
——————————————————————
3/4/2013 – Robert Blaskiewicz

“ANP is toxic as anything!”

“most of Burzynski’s patients never qualify for his trials”

“They all end up taking tons of chemo used off label”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – Susan Scotvold Goodstein

“Airing a film that is nothing more than an advertisement / informercial for Burzynski’s 30 year medical scam is not presenting a fair and balanced program”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – David H. Gorski

“Antineoplastons, however, are neither nontoxic nor an effective treatment”

“In fact, they’re definitely toxic”

“People have developed a dangeros condition called hypernatremia (too high a sodium level) as a result of antineoplaston treatment”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – Adam Jacobs

“Burzynski absolutely does not research “non-toxic” treatments”

“Mostly, he uses conventional chemotherapy, but in a rather amateurish way, using unproven combinations of drugs”

“The treatment that has made him famous, antineoplastons, is highly toxic and has been known to kill people”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – David James

“You run the risk of genuinely endangering people’s lives by exposing them to unproven and ridiculously expensive treatment modalities”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – Adam Levenstein

“do I think that the fraud Burzynski should be promoted with an infomercial on a taxpayer-funded TV station … “
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – William M. London

“Colorado Public Television functions as an infomercial broadcast service for false medical prophets (who profit from Colorado Public Television’s irresponsibility)”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – Paul Morgan

“Antineoplaston chemotherapy – despite the claims of Burzynski and his shills – are far from being non-toxic”

“They contain vast quantities of sodium, which results in patients having to ingest vast quantities of water to counteract the overpowering thirst generated by taking in so much sodium”

“Some patients have become grossly hypernatraemic (high serum sodium), others profoundly hypokalaemic (low serum potassium)”

“Others have developed renal failure”

“All these TOXIC SIDE EFFECTS are extremely hazardous and life-threatening”

“If you consider antineoplastons to be non-toxic, you are seriously deluded”

“If you think antineoplastons are not chemotherapy, you are also wrong”
——————————————————————
3/5/2013 – Tsu Dho Nimh

“You are being co-opted to slather a layer of respectability over Burzynski’s quackery”

“You seem to fit the definition of a media whore … will sell out for ratings”
——————————————————————
3/4/2013 – Val Perry Rendel

“Do I think magic voodoo bullshit should be used to profiteer from human suffering and desperation?”
——————————————————————
3/6/2013 – Andy Roseborrough

“Burzynski not only sells
bullcrap
for profit at the expense of people’s health, but he tries to silence legitimate criticism via his lawyers”

——————————————————————
3/4/2013 – Darren Woodward

” … the completely unproven, very expensive treatments sold to vulnerable people … “

” … rather than informing your audience it looks like you are trying to misinform them”

“by what measure are antineoplastines non-toxic, certainly medically they are toxic”
======================================

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

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

======================================
REFERENCES:
======================================
[1] – Critiquing Wikipedia: Burzynski Clinic, Colorado Public Television (CPT12), and Public Broadcasting System (PBS):
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/critiquing-wikipedia-burzynski-clinic-colorado-public-television-cpt12-and-public-broadcasting-system-pbs/
======================================
[2] – Burzynski updates Scientific Publications page:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/burzynski-updates-scientific-publications-page/
======================================
[3] – Critiquing: American Cancer Society – Antineoplaston Therapy:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/09/critiquing-american-cancer-society-antineoplaston-therapy/
======================================
[4] – University of Michigan, where is alum Dr. David H. “Orac” Gorski’s Grapefruits ?:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/university-of-michigan-where-is-alum-dr-david-h-orac-gorskis-grapefruits/
======================================
“The Skeptics™” Colorado Public Television (CPT12) – PBS Facebook comment links:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/14/the-skeptics-colorado-public-television-cpt12-pbs-facebook-comment-links/
======================================
Questioning “The Skeptics™” Colorado Public Television (CPT12) PBS Facebook comments with links:
——————————————————————
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/09/14/questioning-the-skeptics-colorado-public-television-cpt12-pbs-facebook-comments-with-links/
======================================

Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part I (1)

Reviews and Awards:
__________________________________________
http://www.kpfa.org/events/burzynski-movie-fda-big-pharma-fight-doctor-who-has-cancer-cure
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
3/21/2010 – Garden State Film Festival, New Jersey
http://www.app.com/article/20100321/ENT01/100320023/Garden-State-Film-Fest-moviegoers-delight?nclick_check=1
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
3/25/2010 – The B Plot, The Coaster, Asbury Park, NJ
http://thebplot.wordpress.com/2010/03/25/is-there-a-cure-for-cancer-garden-state-film-festivals-burzynski-film-may-know-exclusive
4/1/2010 – The B Plot, The Coaster, Asbury Park, NJ
screened at the Garden State Film Festival last week
http://thebplot.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/burzynski-documentary-demonstrates-human-life-commoditized-audience-reaction
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
4/2010 – Newport Beach Film Festival, California
Humanitarian Vision Award 2010
http://newportbeachfilmfest.blogspot.com/2010/04/update-burzynski-2nd-screening-added_25.html?m=1
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
5/26/2010 – Yes! Weekly, Mark Burger
http://www.yesweekly.com/triad/article-9521-winston-salem-filmmaker-makes-waves-with-award-winning-medical-documentary.html
6/1/2010 – The Village Voice, Ella Taylor [51]
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-06-01/film/quack-quack-goes-burzynski
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2010 Rotten Tomatoes
42% of critics liked it
88% of users liked it
Average Rating: 4.6/10
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/mobile/m/burzynski_2010
__________________________________________
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/burzynski_2010
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
6/3/2010 – TrustMovies, James van Maanen
http://trustmovies.blogspot.com/2010/06/seek-out-bursynski-documentary-and.html?m=1
6/3/2010 – Variety, Ronnie Scheib
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117942914?refcatid=31
6/3/2010 – Film Threat, Phil Hall
http://www.filmthreat.com/reviews/22302
6/4/2010 – Kevin Thomas of the Los Angeles Times
http://184.173.15.174/~burzynsk/images/stories/Press_Media/Burzynski_latimes_BW.pdf
6/4/2010 – The New York Times, Jeannette Catsoulis
http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/movies/04burzynski.html?scp=1&sq=burzynski&st=cse&_r=0
6/16/2010 – EurPublisher
Excellent (4 stars)
http://www.eurweb.com/2010/06/eur-film-review-burzynski
6/17/2010 – Los Angeles Times, by Kevin Thomas
http://www.burzynskimovie.com/images/stories/Press_Media/Burzynski_latimes_BW.pdf
__________________________________________
http://184.173.15.174/~burzynsk/images/stories/Press_Media/Burzynski_latimes_BW.pdf
__________________________________________
http://moviereviewintelligence.com/movie-reviews/critics/kevin_thomas/1-1-2.html
__________________________________________
Science Guardian
“Burzynski”, whose limited, one week Oscar-qualifying run just ended at New York’s Cinema Village and in LA
http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/burzynski-alternative-medicine-pioneer-conquers-tumors-fda.htm
6/24/2010 – Dr. Joy Browne
Five stars. Joy meter: 5
http://www.burzynskimovie.com/images/stories/Press_Media/Joy_Brown_review.pdf
11/19/2010 – The Movie Film Show: Rated A
Mr. Movie rated 6th best film of 2010
Mr. Film rated 8th best film of 2010
http://www.moviefilmshow.com/movies-films/about/burzynski_the_movie
11/2010 – Townsden Letter, briefed by Jule Klotter
http://www.burzynskimovie.com/images/stories/Press_Media/Townsend_Shorts_Burzynski.pdf
Winter 2010-2011 – The Objective Standard:
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2010-winter/burzynski.asp
__________________________________________
ALIVE Documentary Award, New York
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:4TdKU8yqn4oJ:www.alivenewyork.org/uploads/1/0/3/3/10338129/aliveawardsfinal.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESi5cq6TtHVuyWQzVSbig8CHTiQAkAuTEiU-p2jYGOChV6hKmG3YuHSQgLAakM-Eli9RmDuDX0nQ22Nkz2lzT9bG-CIJTj5p52AMKwzmvAwqluSr6fpgziQzhXNERoIq6YkF6wtO&sig=AHIEtbSBvfjNFC9q281gTaotgApRk1WEwQ
__________________________________________
Official Selection in the Byron Beach International Film Festival (Australia)
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2010 – Palm Beach Film Festival
http://www.pbifilmfest.org/past_festivals/2010/documentaries/burzynski
__________________________________________
http://www.thepalmbeachtimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=230812
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2010 – Honolulu, Hawaii
Accolade in Excelence Award 2010
__________________________________________
http://blog.bigmoviezone.com/docs/awards2010.pdf
__________________________________________
San Luis Obispo International Film Festival, California
http://www.visitslo.com/cm/Releases/Release-FilmFest.html
__________________________________________
1/5/2011 – Salem-News, Tim King (Oregon)
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/january052011/burzynski-cancer-tk.php
6/10/2011 – Salem-News, Tim King (Oregon)
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/june102011/burzynski-film-tk.php
6/11/2011 – Mercola
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/11/burzynski-the-movie.aspx
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
6/15/2011 – Dr. Leonard Coldwell
http://drleonardcoldwell.com/2011/06/15/burzynski-cancer-is-serious-business
__________________________________________
http://drleonardcoldwell.com/tag/dr-burzynski
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
12/2011 – MedCity News
http://medcitynews.com/2011/12/does-burzynski-movie-buzz-come-at-the-worst-time-for-the-fda
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2011 – Moondance International Film Festival
Feature Documentary Film Semi-Finalist 2011
http://moondancefilmfestival.com/02_festival.winners_film.html
__________________________________________
http://www.moondancefilmfestival.com/02_festival.winners_film.html
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
Warsaw International Film Festival
__________________________________________
2011 – Winner! National Audience Award, HumanDoc Festival, Warsaw, Poland, 2011
2011 – Winner! Warsaw Audience Award, HumanDoc Festival, Warsaw, Poland, 2011
http://festival.humandoc.net/25?lang=en
__________________________________________
http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/humandoc/6644119765
__________________________________________
http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/humandoc/6644122939
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2011 – Winner! Audience Award Best Documentary! documentary channel, 2011
2011 – Documentary Channel Best of Doc Award, 2011
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1752221/pg1
__________________________________________
http://blog.documentarychannel.com/post/15572363380/space-tourists-and-burzynski-cancer-is-serious
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2013 – Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business Part II
Coming Early 2013 (Trailer time: .5:09)
http://www.burzynskimovie.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74:airing-on-national-tv-now&catid=39:short-news-updates-front-page-photo
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2012 – The Academy of Comprehensive Integrative Medicine
Lifetime Achievement Award, 2012
http://www.acimconnect.com/Resources/Awards.aspx
__________________________________________
http://www.acimconnect.com/Resources/Awards/StanislawBurzynskiAwardPage.aspx
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
Burzynski Clinic
Legal issues
2010 film
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Burzynski_Clinic&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop