The Genomic Repairman is currently a Ph.D. student who escaped from the deep south, and studies DNA damage and repair through biochemical and genetic approaches. He intends to use pine away about his scientific interests and rant about the things (and there are lots of them) that annoy him.
My posts are presented as opinion and commentary and do not represent the views of LabSpaces Productions, LLC, my employer, or my educational institution.
Please wait while my tweets load
So I came across a movie about Stanislaw Burzynski and his controversial antineoplastons treatment. So I'm pretty sure you are scratching your head wondering what an antineoplaston is? Apparently Burzynski created this convoluted phrase to use instead of simply saying, its a peptide. But take it from top here gang. In 1968, Burzynski graduated from medical school at age 24 in Poland, at age ~25 he also received a doctorate in biochemistry, making him one of the country's youngest M.D., Ph.D. Are you kidding me, when did he start his MSTP training program at age 17? The claim to the Ph.D. is slightly dubious as the medical school at that time was not known to grant Ph.D.'s and faculty at the Medical Academy of Lubin report that Burzyinski only did one year of a lab research project while in medical school to receive this mystery doctorate. Also the guy never received any specialized training in cancer or cancer therapeutics. So flash forward to 1973, Burzynski has spent the past three years at Baylor COM working in a lab isolating peptides from rat brains. He receives his license and is able to practice medicine in the US and also gets a three year grant to study urinary peptides effect on the growth of cancer cells. This grant is not renewed and in 1976 Burzynski announces that he has found the cure to cancer in antineoplastons (peptides) which can "normalize" cancer cells and cause spontaneous regression of cancer.
So Burzynski goes on to treat folks with a derivative of one of his earlier antineoplastons. One of his peptides A-10, piperdine-2,6-dione (PAPD), which is treated to form phenylacetyl glutamine (PAG) which is a detoxification product produced by the detoxification of phenylacetic acid in the liver which itself is normal byproduct of metabolism, albeit toxic. Anywho Burzynski claims that A-10 can bind to DNA, however it has yet to be shown to bind to either the minor or major groove of DNA and Burzyinski himself claims that A-10 is ineffective against cancer.
So let me get this straight, we have a guy with some shaky credentials treating patients with unproven therapies of dubious providence. And to put a final nail in the coffin, the NCI, the Japanese NCI, and Sigma-Tau Pharmaceuticals have yet to be able to prove that any of Burzyinski's "antineoplastons" have an effect on cancer. And Burzynski claims to have treated over 8,000 patients in 20 years but does not release any hard data to support that his therapy is working.
Why is all of this getting my knickers in a bind. Because there is a documentary entitle "Burzynski Movie" out that seems to propagate the myth that Big Pharma and the government are out there holding back a man with the cure for cancer. The documentary is what some would call "one-sided" or as I would call it, a fucking piece of shit. The director only interviews supporters of Burzynski, allows the "physician" to slam chemotherapy and radiation therapy, two proven treatments while allowing him to provide no substantive evidence of his miracle treatment. All this does is incense the tin-foil-hat-wearing-conspiracy-theory-nutjobs and of course their slightly more educated cousins, the alternative medicine believers who dabble in pseudoscience. Don't get me wrong I believe in some alternative medicines, but they have to be proven by "scientific results" and held to the same level of scrutiny as conventional medicine (Tideliar, feel free to jump in and back me up). But what pisses me off, is he is playing with patients emotions and lives. I know all experimental medicines are experimental, but most of them have some decent science behind them and have credentialed and competent clinicians running these trials.
I predict antineoplastons will go the way of the Regenocyte. I've seen some snippets of the film but am trying to get my hand on a copy of the film to give it full critique. So if you have a copy, can I borrow it? I have no intention of paying for that piece of dross.
h/t: Saul Green
This post has been viewed: 66815 time(s)
My cousin is a patient of Burzynski, she has been for 2 years now. diagnosed with an inoperable brain stem tumor grade 3, it was the size of an egg apparently. She was given 3-6 months to live. She was 12.
I mean, I have read about Burzynski and have seen both sides of the stories, and I still couldn't make up my mind. I can see very clearly how both sides can justify why or why not his methods work.
What made up my mind is my cousin. Today she is 14 and has only a pea sized piece of tumor left on her brain stem.
It's hard for me to be skeptical of BUrzynski when I talk to her on the phone and hear about how well she is doing.
All I know is that she used antineoplastons, she had not had any prior treatments as no realistic ones were given "we can try radiation which might give her a month or possibly two"
Sure, it could have been one of those freaky spontaneous remmisions or her immune system kicked in and killed the tumor, but honestly how many stories do we hear about peoples brain tumors just dying? Almost never.
She has made friends through the clinic, some of who she still talks to today, and some which she, sadly, doesn't. Burzynski never claimed he could cure everyone, it's even on his website somewhere, it shits me when I hear people using that line to beat the crap out of the clinic, they obviously never did their research.
Everyone has the right to their opinion, I am a beleiver now, only because of my cousin, who i beleive would not be here today if it werent for the treatment she is on.
But I dunno, things are confusing enough for cancer patients and their families, the last thing they need when surfing the web is to see people either beating the shit out of a treatment or treating it as a miracle cure. I even had to think very hard about posting on here in case someone saw this and thought it was the answer to their prayers.
Hey @Richy, Im glad you posted this. Im really happy to hear your cousin is doing well. You're right things are confusing enough to all patients who have little understood diseases. The controversy out there does make things a lot harder, and there is no certainty with any treatment method.
Anyway, thanks for posting.
Psuedoscience also heavily plays the victim card when challenged to be judged by reason and facts. I strongly believe in evidence-based medicine and treatments rather than personal anectdotes. I'm happy for Richy that his cousin is doing well but there is no clinical evidence that his treatment works. The antineoplaston work cannot be replicated by the NCI and its Japanese equivalent, in addition to a pharmaceutical company. And don't be so daft as to believe that Sigma-Tau would not push this treatment to market if they could get it to work. After all if this is the magic bullet that cures cancer its worth a boatload of money to people. And if this treatment worked so well, there would be no way to suppress it.
I have given you evidence that the therapy does not work, Burzynski's own medical training appear to be suspect, and I wonder if Burzynski notifies his patients of the ethical delimma that he has in treating them since he has a financial interest in the treatment?
None of us are so pure but I also believe that none of us are so evil. That is why I seek the truth in the form of scientific fact and evidence and Burzynski's antineoplaston therapy is seriously lacking.
Mauricio all you have given me is platitudes, rumors, and conjecture. While that may satisfy the burden of proof for many, it does not for me.
people here who are against antineoplastons are connexted to big pharmas or to the FDA fuck you're own shit people and hope you will cancers or tumors and seek Dr. Burzynski for cure . You Moron!
And while you're at it Raph, watch out for Black Helicopters.
Oh! This is the second time recently I've been told I'm connected to Big Pharma (whatever the fuck that is supposed to be...). So...when do i get my check for relentlessly suppressing the truth and martying poor innocent frauds? I mean, they're gonna pay me right?
Tideliar for us being connected to Big Pharma when are we supposed to get our fat fucking paychecks, because I haven't seen mine. Have you seen yours?
No dude. This is bullshit.
I'm gonna OD on homeopathy and totes grab some of those antieoplastons and get to work building my own empire!
hello Henomic repairman,
if you have a family member whom has cancer after checking with all the doctors that you can possibly find and everyone say your love one has no chance of survivial of more than a few months. and if there is a treatment that give a 10% chance of survival, what would you do ? are you going to sit around and wait for "more evidence" or you going to try it!
don't even pretend you know how patient and their families feels and don't pretend you are doing justice to the world by smearing something you do not understand. pharma company do it for a reason, for their own survival, I don't blame them, it is people like you whom jump into conclusion with ignorance that is most disgusting.
I am very experienced with cancer therapeutics having worked with them, worked on clinical trials, and having received them as a patient myself. I am not jumping to conclusions with ignorance, I am skeptical of Antineoplaston therapy based upon the fact that the science is shaky at best, multiple organizations and companies were unable to recreate the results, and no real evidence other than anecdotal stories. I'm not some paid shill for industry and I am quite receptive to alternative therapies as long as there is proper science and evidence that lend credence to their efficacy. One thing that smells funny to me is that all of these trials take place only in Burzynski's clinic, in an environment controlled by him, and he oversees the data. Multisite trials are becoming de rigueur and it seems a little funny that the guy with the biggest financial stake is keeping it all under his thumb? That sounds almost as sinister as what Big Pharma does, at least according to alternative therapy proponents. Hmm, maybe he is no better than they are?
The data collected might not be comprehensive, the statistic might not be as impressive to guarantee a response , maybe Dr Burszynski is too busy focusing on refining the cure then waste what limited resource he has to get recognition by the authority which procedures are dictate by the rich and powerful pharma ?
If it is a hoax, how can it survive so many years (30 years), survive so many trials brought upon him by FDA, and yet has so many patients that supported him ?
so what if only 10% of the patient response to this treatment ? because conventional treatment offers 0% of survival beyond a year ? are we going to dismiss this 10% because its not good enough ? ( the result from the clinical trial are much better than 10%)
i am not here to argue about what would be acceptable data or prove that the treatment works,
i am here as a desperate parent looking for hope for our son, and we are just too tired of everyone telling us nothing would work, and when we found something that offers a hope, everyone else tell us it wouldn't work because it don't have enough data to support, but they never tell you what would.
Dr Burzynski never promise a cure, he pointed straight out, there is as good chance patient might not response, all factors considered, it is our only hope.
the question is, what if.. what if it works, and became one of the approved treatment for certain cancers in the few years time after the sucess in the currently running phase III clinical trial , but someone read your article today and believe in everyword you say, and lost the battle with conventional treatment as predicted by conventional doctors , while anti neoplaston could have save his or his family life, are you able to live with that consequences of taking away the chance for his/her to survive ?
Once again John you try to tug at heartstrings, which while quite compelling cannot stand up to the light of fact and reason.
Effective treatments don't survive, they flourish. Antineoplastons clinical trials have never made it past Phase II to the best of my knowledge, which means they haven't survived the holy grail of testing, Phase III. And from my understanding these trials have dragged on because they can't fill the study cohorts. How do we really know that only 10% of these patients respond to this treatment. Has it been independently reviewed outside of Burzynsky's purview?
And as far as refining the cure (your words not mine), if Burzynski want's to do that, he needs to go back to the drawing board. The basic science of antineoplastons is seriously flawed. As far as if this treatment ever becomes valid and useful to cancer patients and I doubt it would. I would publish a retraction and if someone saw this post hopefully they would approach it with skepticism too and do their own due diligence and do a little further research.
Burzynski doesn't need to use his "precious resources" to get recognition from Big Pharma, but rather the FDA and the medical community and so far that's lacking. I would believe more if his studies were multisite or he had a presence of independent oversight during these "trials."
We are gratified and excited by the announcement this week that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reached an agreement with the Burzynski Research Institute, Inc., for the design of a phase III trial of antineoplaston therapy for the treatment of diffuse intrinsic brainstem glioma, a rare but highly aggressive form of childhood brain cancer. This agreement effectively clears the way for the initiation of this important clinical trial. Stanislaw R. Burzynski, MD, who discovered antineoplastons and now heads the Burzynski Research Institute, has dedicated his life to the pursuit of less invasive means of cancer treatment. The announcement of the Institute’s agreement with the FDA marks a professional and personal triumph for Dr. Burzynski.
The following is the text of a press release sent out last week by the Burzynski Research Institute, announcing the agreement:
The Burzynski Research Institute, Inc. (BRI) announced that it has reached an agreement with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that enables the company to move forward immediately with a 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 a synthetic version of naturally occurring peptides and amino acid derivatives found in the human body to target and control cancer cells without destroying normal cells. The agreement was made under the FDA's Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) procedure and means that the design and planned analysis of the Phase III study is acceptable to support a 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 and challenged further by severely limited treatment options and clinical trials that could expand and 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, and 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 and have made considerable progress on the steps mandated by the FDA to bring a new drug to a patient community and cancer type that has unmet needs."
The primary objective of this 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) and AS2-1 (Astugenal)] plus radiation therapy (RT) versus RT alone.
"DBSG are considered to be one of the most difficult types of cancer to treat. It combines highly malignant characteristics with the very difficult location of the brainstem. DBSG are inoperable because they involve most of the brainstem (diffuse and intrinsic). The number of children in the U.S. with brainstem gliomas is approximately 660. Absent treatment, the survival rate from time of diagnosis is six months or less.
At present, there are no standard curative treatments for the disease. RT is the only treatment that may slow its progress, but at two years 93% of children with this type of cancer die, and none of them survive for five years. Other conventional treatments such as chemotherapy have generally been tried in clinical trials but are shown to be ineffective. There are no pharmacological treatments approved for DBSG at this time.
Looks like there is a phase 3 trial
Phase III trials start this year, the protocal for has just been finished.
Who cares if he asks for a shit load of money, if we had to pay for chemotherapy the costs would be just as high as what Burzynski is asking.
As for effective treatments flourishing, I somehow doubt that if you had a loved one given 6 months to live and they offered you the "flourishing treatment" of gruelling chemo which really only gives them a year or so more (sometimes less) to live that you would not look for other options.
This treatment has alredy been useful to cancer patients, my beautiful cousin, and there are others out there, I'm not syaing theres tons but it's a hell of a shitload more than if you walked into any childrens oncology ward and asked how many survivors of high grade inoperable brain tumors they had, compared to Burzynski
And yes I'm tugging at the heartstrings too, coz that is what it's all about, La de la de la.
It is sad that a seemingly inteligent person like yourself would condem a man like Dr Burzynski before you even examine all the facts. I don't care if he is or was a sanitary engineer, if he found or claimed to find a cure for cancer he should be listened to. Doctors have been put on too high a shelf. As soon as their mainline of thinking is challenged they go on the defencive not willing to put their ego aside and take the chance of being proved wrong.
I hope that you never face a diagnoses of cancer, but if you do wouldn't you want to be able to examine all your options and choose which is best for you.
I find it interesting that illiterates and low class scum like Tideliar post comments here in the language and style that they do without realising that their cras utterances tend to suggest a serious microbe/bacterial infection of the mouth. Perhaps they should have it seem to before it spreads to the brain. Besides illustrating their pathetic illiteracy they go on to air their ignorance regarding history.The medical/ industry, particularly in the English speaking world, is in dire need of some introspection primarily due to their dabling in and perpetuation o,f lies and deceipt for the purposes of extracting funds from unsuspecting victims. Medico babble has run its course and we will move on in exactly the same way as we moved on from leeching in the 1800's. The body has way more capablilty to correct itself than most would beleive. We have become so hypnotised by the medical proffession telling us that only they can cure us that we have relinquished and suppressed the bodies natural ability to do so. It is glaring ly obvious why mediacl practitioners woudl want to dissuade and discourage patients from healing themselves.
As a trained Microbiologist/Virologist, it would seem that 'Sam' has an infection of his hands that leads to poor coordination and recognition of misspelled words.Clearly something must be wrong with his eyes too, as he couldn't see the spell check button on the "Add Comment?" field.
Go fuck yerself. I'll have you know I'm fuckken middle-class scum, you semi-literate knuckle-dragging shitstain.
@Geeka : I know I'm still just a med student, but I'll throw non-fluent aphasia out there.
@TJ : I've been sitting on a foie gras post for a while, but each time I read the new comments here I add more to it.
I type too fast to be bothered with spell checkers and hey do I detect a note of nervousness in some of the reaction to my post? As for you Tideliar I don’t fuck anybody without a photo first. Since I don’t have any pics of myself I guess that’s out of the question. I’m pleased to see you have managed to advance 'one small step' up the ladder of hip hop dung.
As for all those trapped in the narrow band of the self righteous smugness of ‘we know it all’ I caution you to reflect once again on history and project yourselves forward in time so that you may objectively look back at your axioms. Maybe you will find the flaw of pride and haughty pomposity clouding the lens of your antiquated microscopes.
First of all Geeka the 'add comment' button is not in a 'field' it is in a Toolbar and secondly the article is not 'on' its 'in' and furthermore a 'field' is part of a data structure which is typically an element of a 'record' pertaing to data definitions.
Perhaps you should confine yourself to microbes and spell checkers
Tommy boy, if you look at my post I did not deny the existence of a Phase III clinical trial, I merely said that it had yet to survive it and come out the other side. You could take a dog terd (which probably has a greater efficacy than antineoplastons) to Phase III, that doesn't mean it is going to be better than the standard of care treatment. Hell the dog terd's mechanism of action is probably more solid than that of antineoplastons. Besides other groups have tried and failed to replicate Burzynski's claims. And if they could of they would have made a boatload of money, but it could never be replicated. So they left that shit to die by the side of the road while moving on to therapies that you know are based on sound science and help people out in the future.
Phillie-my-boy, I did just have my own bout with cancer and you know what homeboy? I chose to have a real, FDA-approved, clinically effective treatment that was based on sound science and not some bullshit like antineoplastons. And I can report, I'm feeling great.
Sam-I-am, I really don't know where to begin with you my dear chap I dare you to come up with enough creativity to string together a poetically beautiful and profane stream of consciousness like Tideliar does. And as far as comparing modern medicine to leeching you must be some kind of goddamn Mongoloid dumpsterbaby. Are you one of those quack chiropractics or energy healers? Seriously, if it weren't for modern medicine you would probably be dead from some infection or other malady. Despite your fucking rambling and waste of bandwith, I still see this is a positive and gives us the opportunity to FWDAOTI. So in Tideliaresque fashion, I bid you good day motherfucker for you are a loathsome swine, too fucking ignorant to poor piss from a boot, your tender whimpering does nothing but offendeth me, so be gone you ghastly motherfucker. Good riddince and may the local authorities not find you during your ritualistic comingling with livestock on the eves of full moons.
In an odd twist of nature and freak alchemy of fusion between genetic low self esteem and delusions of grandeur, the new species of brat was spawned, the web brat, presenting such a vivid, colourful, finely rendered image of quality America and its sophisticated people. Fortunately the majority of Americans are not like you but unfortunately it is not their image that is being saturated across the ether but yours.
Be proud and revel therein, passing yourself off as some kind of erudite engineer of scientific procedure and method when in fact all you are doing is manifesting an inability to express yourself coherently in true academic fashion, which you fraudulently attempt to claim by misleading the uninitiated via your cheap low class hip hop grunting, tantamount to a savage mish mash of barbaric expletives.
As for modern medicine, and again I remind you, it will recant the majority of its foundations, which you so wildly proclaim, within the next 15-25 years. Here is an example of your ‘modern medicine’ as practised over the last 50 years: ‘Say Aaahhh! Good now get this antibiotic prescription filled. Take one after meals and pay the receptionist as you leave, thank you. NEXT!!!
As for my demise being averted by the hocus pocus you advocate let me remind you also that the greatest advance in medical practice…. EVER… was the commencement of the washing of hands.
I bid you bon voyage as you wallow in your arrogance. Everything that is an unshakeable truth today is eroded by time and ingress into the future and deteriorates into a silly untruth tomorrow. This the consequence of the failure of the bombastic like you, to learn, by prematurely jumping to conclusions and shouting these false facts from the roof tops only to face the recanting thereof shortly after. This pattern has occurred and repeated for millenniums and only the real strugglers are incapable of spotting it.
Wallowing in my arrogance? Well Sammyboy, what can I say it is comfortable. Genetic low self-esteem? I've got Adonis DNA bro! I'm like an F-18 bro!
"Be proud and revel therein, passing yourself off as some kind of erudite engineer of scientific procedure and method when in fact all you are doing is manifesting an inability to express yourself coherently in true academic fashion, which you fraudulently attempt to claim by misleading the uninitiated via your cheap low class hip hop grunting, tantamount to a savage mish mash of barbaric expletives"
Rather than using a ridiculous amount of letters and bandwidth how about you get to point? You disagree with my take on this "therapeutic intervention." That's fine and dandy. I presented my facts to back up why I believe it is bogus, where are yours to validate this. Instead you come on here rambling on about medico babble and antibiotics, incoherently I might add.
What makes this crap even more bogus is that he is trying to promote his therapy in a documentary. I guess that is the way to market new agey crap these days but I don't see many cancer therapies being marketed this way. Rather they are marketed upon the sound science and clinical efficacies.
And why do you have to resort to ageism Sam. I don't assume that you are old and fucking decrepit, like your progeroid cohort who fucked up America, leaving my generation to piece the shit back together thanks to your blind ineptitude and fucking greed holmes. Who's to say I don't have some gray hairs on my balls man?
And to finish off, I invoke Iron Mike Tyson:
"I'm the best ever! There is no one who can match me. My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious. I want his heart! I want to eat his children! Praise be to Allah!"
Comic I am absolutely thrilled that you are reverting to proper discourse. I could actually end up having some respect for you...if you drop the hip hop. You are bright ..you dont need the hip hop verneer to validate you. Lose it and I will concede some points which you now make more eloquently and maybe we can explore some of these issues further because they are more important than the sum of our collective ego's? Your very last comment suggests that we may have a common agenda. Salaam-Alaikum.
Wow! Is it possible to tone this down? Neither "side" here is advancing anything that a reader can appreciate as even interesting because of all the static. I could elaborate, but I'll leave it there. OK? Now before I proceed, have a bit of fun and guess where I stand on this subject.
Before I make my main point I'll tell you about a discovery made on the island of Sardinia post WWII by a professor of hygiene. This man took lessons from the discovery of penicillin, which led him to culture sewage. He isolated an antibiotic-producing fungus, Cephalosporium acremonium. Many steps and several years later, the first antibiotic of the cephalosporin class was introduced. Compare that to this.
Anyone guessed yet? (i.e., have I taken a side?)
Now I can tell you that before any antibiotic of the cephalosporin class was made available for general clinical use (hospitals, office prescriptions, etc), rigorous testing was conducted. Is this testing, this process, "perfect"? Well, folks, nothing is. People apply pressure, money is involved, people are swayed by various influences. No human endeavor escapes these side issues. If you think the vitamin and food supplement industry (it is an industry) is beyond these issues of human interaction, may I respectfully suggest you think again.
My question in reading about anti-neoplastons is, where is the rigorous testing? Where is the data on people treated? One success, as wonderful as that is for one patient and her family, doesn't make the grade for promoting a treatment. I can't because of space/time issues go into the details here, but there are many hurdles before any drug is approved. It takes some minimal science background at the least to have a clue as to what these hurdles are and why they are there. Can I just say that the endeavor of science must make a virtue of scepticism. So if you aren't sceptical and don't come into this discussion with some basic science/biology background then you are engaging in a popularity contest, which is a poor way to make decisions on important matters like cancer treatments. So which boogeyman is worse, the greedy pharmaceutical CEO or the medical quack? Relating back to any discussion of drugs, testing, effects, toxicities, etc, sometimes one needs to say : "I don't know enough about this subject to have a valid opinion." A famous American once said "A man's gotta know his limitations."
Ask yourselves, are there experts in this field? Have they looked at this question and expressed opinions? What did they look at to reach conclusions? I provide you below with a source, but there are others. A pissing contest, which many of you obviously enjoy getting into, is not going to get to the truth of ther matter.
I haven't looked exhaustively at this subject, I don't have the time. I believe however that I have done due diligence in looking for evaluations and data. What I have found points to there being a class of chemicals which can be hypothesized to have an impact on cancer cells. Carried through on humans there does not seem to be any evidence beyond the anecdotal of any benefit. Additionally, there have been major toxicity effects involved in administration. In an interview I viewed today by a Dr. Mercola (see his website) of the discoverer of antineoplastons and his son, I found no more evidence of efficacy but did come away with the feeling that toxicity was being skirted as an issue.
For more details, I refer you to The Cancer Letter, vol 24 No.36 Sept 25, 1998. A bit outdated, but start there. Education is a powerful tool.
I'll end with a quote from another famous American:
"It aint what you don't know that gets you in trouble, but what you know for sure that just ain't so."
You can watch the full movie here for free ...
If you really believe the government has public health in mind you must be on crack !!!
The government of this and most countries does not care if you die ... I can prove it to you in the next statement of fact.
Fact: Our government makes marijuana illegal !!! you will go to jail for selling this stuff... yet no i repeat no deaths are attrbuted to it year after year.
Fact: These same governments allow alcohol and tobacco to be sold on virtually every street corner.
Deaths attrbuted to alcohol and tobacco every year ... what do you think ? More than 1 lol
thousands of people die and or killed by alcohol abuse... there is no legitamate reason in this world for alcohol and tobacco to be sold to human beings.
How many people and children abused because of alcohol ??? give me a break >>> the govermnet does not care about preventing any disease or deaths.
Billions spent on cancer CURE research for a patented PILL they can sell to make billions in profits...
how many of those billions have been dedicated to provide a prevention or natural cure for cancer ???
Want more proof... Vitamin d the wonder vitamin really its a hormone, can be gotten in winter months from tanning beds...
our goverment wants to regulate who and how much tanning you do in a salon. Vitamin d experts say high levels of vitamin d can prevent many cancers and other diseases...
How ever , the governmaent allows prescription drugs and even aspirin to be pumped into human beings with side effects rsulting in death.
Thousands of people die every year just from aspirin ...
the government does not care to support any natural health alternatives for human health...
The food additives put in our food supply
the hydrogented fats allowed
how about the genetically modified foods you are eating and don't even know becuase your government does not think you have the right to know or choose
what fod you are eating.
how about the prescription drugs being abused by our children -
the health departments of our governments should be taken to court for negelct and all be put in jail.
Aspirin has been around for centuries .
The pharma industry are responsible for horrible crimes against humanity which started with the nazis.Modern cancer treatment is a pile of shit , pump you full of drugs that destroy your body.What the fuck is happening over there 2 year olds with brain tumours.big question mark there ?.
Well, I have read all the foregoing and am not surprised at the tone of some of the contributions. Some of the more scurrilous are very funny but do not enhance either the quality or seriousness of the debate. The spelling leaves a lot to be disired. One of the comments I thought that was pertinent was the one about doctors washing hands before they leave the autopsy room so that the disease was not transferred to the living. It took some time for this simple remedy to be accepted. The doctor who discovered it died from an infection he picked up through a cut in his skin.
I have prostate cancer so I am interested in an alternative treatment to prostatectomy which is proposed for the end of July. I believe that it is sensible to research other methods and antineoplastons might just be the solution as my medical team have ruled out everything medical as suitable treatment. I do not want to lose my prostate if oit can be avoided as the side effects are unpleasant but at the moment my condition is not life threatening. If it was I would be in serious discussion with Dr Burzynski.
It would seem that the good Dr has had a rough time at the hands of the FDA but they still come back for more. It is a disgraceful witchhunt. Either prove his system does not work or shut up.
I think you have your logic backwards there. Science is all about finding concrete evidence to support claims. If Dr. Burzynski can't provide evidence in the form of a well controlled study then he should not be allowed to tout his snake oil as a treatment.
Ding Ding Ding, Brian is on the money. The way therapeutics work is you prove that they work and that they are at least as good if not better than the standard of care, not that they don't.
Comic welcome back. Apologies I was not aware of your situation. Perhaps consider a falsis principiis proficisci- Otta Warburg for re evaluation?
If the video proved anything, it DEFINITELY beyond doubt proves the FDA is hell bent on wasting tax payer dollars on court trials rather than performing clean, unhindered, unbiased clinical trials.
Instead the FDA is working closely with their pharma chums (who stuff the FDA's pockets with large sums of cash $$$) to make sure nobody can get a slice of the huge $ trillion dollar pie.
It's absolutely criminal.
Ding Ding Ding, Brian is on the money. The way therapeutics work is you prove that they work and that they are at least as good if not better than the standard of care, not that they don't.
Ok, so I've watched the movie and read up on this case. I also have a Ph.D. and work at a major research university. First of all, it seems that the Antineoplastons have had lots of success, but haven't undergone a real clinical trial. The movie gives reasons why it hasn't undergone a real clinical trial: 1) patent issues, 2) money / conspiracy theory, 3) Egos of major players in the system 4) regulation. According to the movie - and to the best of my knowledge, this is all accurate - in order for the FDA to do a clinical trial, one has to supply significant amounts of cash. In order to get this cash, one needs either a corporate partner, or to raise it through venture capital. Bruzynski has failed to get these, in part, because of his poor relationship with the FDA... so we start to have some circular logic issues going. But even with his phase III trials approved, he is required to give patients radiation therapy as well. So this is a) not a double blind trial, b) not isolating the antineoplastons as a treatment. If you treat people with both radiation and anti-neoplastons, you won't be able to determine which worked. You need some people treated who get nothing, and some with anti-neoplastons. The problem, of course, is that this is unethical. If anti-neoplastons work, then it would be unethical to withhold them from the control group.
I have, however, seen research where the treatment is so effective, that the FDA discontinues the trial and recommends everyone take the treatment. In addition, this relates well to the type I vs type II error debate in statistics. Generally, we base all of our efforts to avoiding a type I error and towards making a type II error. A type I error would be concluding that a treatment is effective when it actually is not, and a type II error is concluding that a treatment is ineffective when it actually is. Low sample sizes lead us to make type II errors more frequently. But really, we ought to consider the consequences of a type I vs type II error. IN this case, a type II error is that people die, and a type I error is that they receive a harmless ineffective treatment (and waste some cash).
It seems to me that this treatment, if the data in the movie is to believed - ought to get a double blind test for multiple types of cancer. Further, it also seems to me that if he really has given some several hundred people treatments - for inoperable terminal cancers - and they have survived - that that is enough evidence to approve the use of the drug for that type of cancer already.
The dozens of people alive with "miraculous" recoveries should be enough anecdotal evidence that this treatment works. Why is there no controlled study? Because of the problems getting FDA approval. Why is there problems getting FDA approval? Watch the movie... it's been going on 25 years, and seems most clearly to do with institutional culture at the FDA and the egos of a select few individuals with power. According to data presented in the movie - the average "success" rate with traditional treatment is utter failure. Most of these people with terminal cancer die. The movie presents the MRI data and the medical records data of enough individuals to demonstrate that this treatment is working.
You have to be kidding me, "Dr. Dan M., PhD." I like how you try to credential yourself without actually providing information on who you are. It's a great way to fake authority. If you truly were a scientist, you'd be just as outraged as we are about the use of anecdotal evidence to prove a disease therapy. No scientist would ever say, "Well, there's 20 people in some super biased video that SAY they were cured. That's proof enough for me that this is an effective treatment!!" Does this mean that in your top research lab you do single replicate experiments and don't run controls? There's no conspiracy here, its just not an effective treatment. Follow up by other labs, as stated above, cannot find an association with this treatment and a benefit to cancer patients.
Anectdotal evidence does not reach the level of scientific validation. And while the FDA system sucks and it really does, many other drugs from small time folks have made it across the finish line. So if they can do it, why not Burzynski's therapy?
The most damning thing is that other labs and corporations have tried to reproduce his work and they can't reproduce his "miracles." Which is fairly bad as science and medicine are based off of the reproduction of sound evidence.
Please Watch The Whole Movie at burzynski.com thenmake an educated coment.
Its worth your time.
Your an ass hole.
The government wants you sick so that the most powerful cash cow can keep making money at your expense while you get sicker with the traditional crap treatments they approve. It's in their best interest because the FDA and pharm corps are in bed together. Hello wake up!
Ladies and gentlemen, its black helicopters and tin-foil hat time!
Ohhhh, can we crash one in Burzynski's secret compound??
Damnit Brian you aren't supposed to give up the secrets to our New World Order, now we'll have to use the fluoride in the water to do some mind control.
I can't wait until they find out what we've been putting in the tinfoil...
Did you just slag off a film that you admit you haven't seen?
So, I watched the movie. Don't ask why I did. But, after doing so, I started digging into the financials of the company. Which posted almost $4M losses for 2010Q4, and is on track to exceed $4M for 2011Q3. In light of this information, I now want to begin proceedings for a leveraged buyout. The impetus for this, is that I spent 108 minutes watching abject stupidity, and I want those 108 minutes of my life back. Since I can't do that, I want to hurt the person responsible for that schlock.
Given the assets listed in their 2010FY statement, I'm pretty sure I can buy the clinic with a capital injection of less than $1.9M, and sell off the physical assets for ~$6M. The money will then be turned over to y'know...actual labs and clinics treating cancer patients.
You know, I understand that it must be hard for people to go to work on a Monday knowing that they've wasted the last 5 years or whatever of their careers on what amounts to 'the lesser of 2 evils' (ie chemo, RT, etc) when someone comes along with something that actually works but for crying out loud, unclench a bit and LISTEN. The guy has documented cases of cures that the medical establishment could only counter with a prognosis of 'a few months at best' or similar. Hell, even the FDA agree with that. The FDA, that disgrace of an institution, that whore for Big Pharma, bought and paid for, has dogged this man for DECADES with frivolous accusations and school yard hand wringing to NO AVAIL. Don't blame him for the lack of decent clinical trials, blame the FDA. Bottom line is that he can FIX PEOPLE where standard practise can't. WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU SO AFRAID OF???
Somewhere above, there's this: "... But what pisses me off, is he is playing with patients emotions and lives. I know all experimental medicines are experimental, but most of them have some decent science behind them and have credentialed and competent clinicians running these trials."
Talk about jaw-droppingly stupid. Playing with patients emotions and lives? Are you the full quid? And the FDA are what, acting in patients' best interests? I think no. And how about this little gem: "...I know all experimental medicines are experimental, but most of them have some decent science behind them..." MOST of them? And the others, pray tell? And you'll need to define exactly what "decent science" is supposed to represent here too because it seems to me that unbiased science is the last thing the FDA is interested in.
The next time you want to defame someone who doesn't happen to agree with your world view of things, at least do them the simple courtesy of walking a mile or 2 in their shoes first.
After watching the movie, which I agree is very one-sided, I came looking for some intelligent debate and discussion refuting the movie and it's assertions. The link to this page was 3rd on the google search (which will no doubt give you some undeserved feelings of self-importance). Thanks for not helping your argument one iota.
I finally found a use for google's page ranking system and wouldn't you know it, they've removed it. Bugger.
Serge, clinical trials have been done. Millions of dollars have been spent by scientists to test antineoplastons as a therapy and no positive results have come out of these scientific studies.
Here's some further reading if your interested in hearing what the scientific establishment has to say, and not the propoganda of a snake oil salesman.
Managing social conflict in complementary and alternative medicine research: the case of antineoplastons. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15035877
Alternative cancer cures: "unproven" or "disproven"? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15061600
The whole point of the FDA is to regulate drug sales based on evidence of efficacy. So yes, they do have the public's best interest in mind and your conspiracy theories are unfounded.
Wow.... Seems to be a lot of naysayers in this thread... Well that is your decision. I believe the reason for not having a lot of clinical trials is the the FDA LIMITED HIM TO HIS OWN FACILITY! He WANTED to do this from the beginning, but the FDA SAID NO.
Like it or hate it, there does seem to be some legitimacy in his treatments. Why did Johns Hopkins (HUGE cancer clinic) try to patent it and push it out? Why did one of his own research assistants put HER name on the patents that were later applied for with the company that attempted to do business with Burzynski?
Sounds fishy to me folks.
Traditional chemo and radiation is still in 'test' phase. Chemo opens up the body to so much other stuff that you simply CANNOT survive. My Dad had cancer and he refused chemo. Once he didn't follow their chain of command, the system shut him out. Their prognosis was he had less than three months to live. My Mom researched a pile of NATURAL alternative medications, and he survived almost a year in GREAT shape (considering he was dieing of cancer).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it kids:-).
I'm siding with Dr. B:-).
Klem, there were clincal trials. The results were negative. This has nothing to do with Burzynski being pushed out by the FDA. His treatment didn't work in humans, so research on it was dropped.
Again, those results from the 'clinical' trials were they not proven that the people in charge did NOT know what they were doing and ruined these so called trials?
Again, sounds pretty darn fishy to me...
So, it has gone to Phase III, so we shall see how this goes:-).
The proof shall come out in the pudding so there is no real point in debating what is pure speculation at this point in time.
Did you also know that high doses of Vitamin C proved to cure some types of cancer and that the government wanted to change a vitamin to a medicine (therefore only a doctor could prescribe and the pharmaceuticals profit)?
Again, there is a 'fifedom' in the oncology world, and BILLIONS to be made... Once you drive the profit out of healthcare will the true answers come out:-).
I still stick with Doc B.:-).
Firstly I decided to bail from this veil of tears but have returned for the simple reason that I see someone else (only 1) who has identified Tideliar correctly.
Secondly as for the debate on trials (which tends to approximate childishness in this debate) and the integrity of Scientific method I find some of those who lay Ph. D. behind their auspicious names seem to be victims once again of the subjective obtuseness (perhaps graduating prior to the onset of real maturity) of leaping to premature conclusions. Please refrain from and do not fall foul of contaminating centuries of academic standard. Scientific proof comes via many different methods. Being stuck on one will tend to blind one from truth elswhere. A truth missed constitutes a setback of decades and a severe tragedy for scientific progress.
Let me lay it out for you clearly so that their is no ambiguity. In any path of progress wrt to knowledge if at every step we could confidently pin our postion as correct then our progress would be predictable and assured. This however is not the case and never in 10 000 years of fiddling with fire and such, has been. So the proper sceintific approach is to retain a non bigoted open mind and consider all avenues. Arrogance has to be absolutely relinquished from the debate else such debate will become contaminated by ego. Time itself in concert with our constructive intellectuall assistance will anachronously verify.
SCHLOCK wtf is SCHLOCK. I thought this was a debate in English not Yiddish? No one here speaks Yiddish JaySeeDub so what is the schlock about?
For fuck's sake are you all still talking about this fraud and his bullshit science*? You are clogging up my inbox with this meandering, pointless wankerey
Really, any real life growd up scientist knows this is bullshit. It doesnt take a fucking PhD to understand the biology behind it is fucking useless. It also doesnt take years of clinical training to realise that some fruitcake talking shit and publishing rubbish* isn't evidence.
Show me evidence, not gossip and I'll listen. Until then STFU. Go to the library, or the local community college, or indeed, ask a reallife clinical scientist**.
You are all trolls, morons, or idiots utterly incapable of simple reason. Go cling to faith if it helps you, but science doesn't work that way. (Your empty faith might make you feel better, but could you go do it on creation/ID/god-fearing/fag hating/jihad loving websites instead? )
I hope the former, because then you're just an asshole on the internet. Welcome. But if the latter then 'god' help us all. PLease don't breed and populate the world with illinformed, unreasonable morons incapable of cogent and coherent thought***.
*just an opinion libel lawyers, just an opinion...
**yes, I am. It's bullshit. Now you know. Go get real medical help because this will kill you/your loved ones****.
***FUck off, yes I am capable of both and did with this post, I just happen to be vituperative, but your innane bullshit utterly takes the piss and ruins my faith in humanity.
****but sometimes it's terminal, and terminal means terminal. Sometimes people die and it's just not fair. Sorry. Welcome to the real world.
Oh and Sharonak, you're an anti-semite bitch. Way to Godwin your point, you ill-bred prick.
Sorry, I'm just going to have to disagree with you.
Tell you what, perhaps you should discuss the results of these clinical trials and whether the treatments work in humans with some of the people who's names appear down the right side of this page: http://www.burzynskipatientgroup.org. Go on, pick a few and read their stories. I'm sure they'd love to hear from you.
Speaking of these negative clinical trials, where are they? You refer me to a couple of papers that review the results of, frankly, a study  that was designed to fail by blatantly altering the agreed upon protocol and effectively diluting the treatment doses to the point where they were completely ineffective. Or perhaps the NCI were more interested in trying to determine the efficacy of the homeopathic application of antineoplastons? If instead you are referring to the work of Dr. Dvorit Samid, you'll have problems there too.
In the interests of full disclosure and for the record, I'm in no way associated with Dr. Burzynski or any associates of his, nor am I in need of his treatments, though my mum died of cancer 4 years ago. I came across Dr. Bruzynski and his work via a recent article on Mercola.com.
And here's something else I'll tell you. If I knew then what I know now, besides force feeding my mum copious quantities of Vitamin D3, I'd have arranged to secure a supply of these antineoplastons. My guess is that I'd still have my mother. And you know what else? Neither of those 2 treatments would have done her a zot of harm.
As for your links, unfortunately, I don't have full access to the first document. But from what I can gather from the abstact, this 'review' is based around the trial  where Dr. Burzynski explains quite clearly in the movie (you HAVE seen it, haven't you?) that the treatment doses used in trial were far too weak to have had any effect. This is after the protocol used in the trials that had been finally agreed to by both parties was altered by the NCI with Dr. Burzynski's explicit disapproval and explanation of why he disapproved. Talk about designed to fail. Be that as it may, your reference to this paper in no way helps your argument because, as stated in the SECOND SENTENCE of the abstract, "Four years and more than a million dollars later, these studies were stopped before it was possible to determine the effectiveness of antineoplastons." Scratch that from this list of clinical trials you mysteriously refer to.
As for the second paper, I'd like say straight up that I can't remember a more blatant case of 'failure by association'. Kind of like an 'ad hominem' for clinical trials. And yet, I read on. This paper again refers to the disputed, and aborted, 1999 trial . The other study referred to  seems to indicate a positive outcome, though again, I only have access to the abstract. Moreover, as you well know, a Phase I trial is designed to determine toxicity levels, so the inclusion of this study to show negative response to treatment is somewhat dubious. I still haven't seen a clear example of a clinical trial that proves that Dr. Bruzynski's therapy "doesn't work in humans", as you put it.
One last point I'd like to make is that for a treatment that has supposedly been proven to be ineffective, in 1987 I might add, I find it kind of strange that Phase III trials are about to commence: http://www.burzynskiresearch.com/pipeline.html.
I'll leave it at that.
PS. Tideliar, give yourself an uppercut and snap the fuck out of it, you muppet.
 Jan C. Buckner, M.D., et al; "Phase II Study of Antineoplastons A10 (NSC 648539) and AS2-1 (NSC 620261) in Patients With Recurrent Glioma", Mayo Clin Proc 1999;74:137-145; http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/content/74/2/137.full.pdf, Accessed 23-Jun-2011.
 Burzynski SR, Kubove E, Burzynski B. Phase I clinical studies of antineoplaston A5 injections. Drugs Exp Clin Res 1987;13(Suppl 1):37–43.; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3569014, accessed 23-Jun-2011.
Im a Palestinian. HTF can I be anti semetic you imbecile?
Methinks Tideliar needs help. He thinks he is the only Ph.D here. Or is he? Or maybe he thinks he doesnt think or doesnt think that he doesnt think or thinks that he does think that he doesnt think. I have a good friend in another dicipline. Psychiatry. Tide I shall give you his number with pleasure. I also have a colleague in drug habilitation and alcohol dependency support services. My friend, we love you and are concerned. Help is only a friendly blog/chat/sms/twit away.
@Sharonak: inbred. fuck off. You're a bore. Troll harder or leave.
@Sam: *yawn* whatevs Poe
Ah Comic but scientific result is anachronous and hence by implication anecdotal. This is the great scientific dilemma. There is no fixed reference frame. That's what makes it so diffculti. This is the trpa I have consistently alluded to. And I am dyslexic.
Nah, I you're just addicted to your thesaurus and wikipedia. Can haz pretend logic101 and argument by authority?
Shoo fly. Go fish. Have fun
Coherent arguments make for good debate Sam, whitless babbling however doesn't. But good luck with the dyslexic thing.
Sharonak: keep chucking rocks buddy but make sure to take off running before an IDF tank rolls over your dumbass.
Is Sharonak a reference to Ariel Sharon? I thought it was like "Sharon with an AK" Some muppet in a redneck state with a gun... SharonAK(47), you know? Typical gun toting baptist/presbytarian fundamentalist... I thought I was getting trolled by a 2nd Amendement freak with a Pro-Palestian/anti-Zionism bent!
hahah! you live and learn huh?
Sam though. I dunno, just kind of got a 'I haz access to the internets' vibe on that one. "One wiki to bring them all, one wiki to rule them all and in the darkness (of my mothers basement) one wiki to bind them", kind of thing.
WTF is a wiki? I'm still pimping Alta-Vista baby to get my info on coffee enemas curing leprosy?
Who ever started this page is a fucking retard. You clearly didnt watch the documentary or did your research are all. Stop spreading your disinformation.
You must work for the american government.
As a poor old English working man with no qualifications or education , I would like to say that this subject , although posted to by obviously intelligent and well read people , was thoroughly ruined by the totally needless invective and personal comments punctuated by deliberate use of foul language . Ordinary people find it easier to follow a reasoned debate that uses polite , factual , incisive argument .
The bad language used by some posters only serves to belittle those who insist on thinking it adds to their image .
I am not religious , politically correct or free from bad language myself . I am an ex soldier , truck driver and warehouse manager who could hold my own with the most foul mouthed in society , but , I have respect for my fellow humans and do not subject them to the lowest form of debating language just because I can . Respect yourselves Tideliar et al , drop the posing language , present the facts in a form of language that you would like others to use in front of your children , you will be rewarded with the respect of others for your obvious intelligence in it`s own right and your debates will carry far more weight .
Hmm, EVEN if this Dr needed more multi-site trials, the fact is they are moving into Phase 3 show this IS promising research, even if it has yet to be perfected.
A lot of really uneducated people on this site. Probably middle-America! There is a big difference between paranoid, ignorant and aware. The important point in this film is not so much about how we cure disease (I think everyone intelligent already know big pharma like any multi-million, is a corrupt business.)The point is that it was more important for the FDA and US Government to put this harmless scientist in jail and steal his patents then fund his research, wake up America...
The anti-goverment / anti-pharma conspiracy theory line is getting really old now.
Conspiracy theorists who blame some shadow government or entity for their failure is the equivalent of your idiot friend that blames everyone else for them sucking at life......
Sorry I'd finish the rest of my comment but I've got to board my black helicopter. Quick Brian get onboard, there are many other cures that we must suppress!
There is ample evidence these trials work There are in fact trials ongoing on 72 different types of cancer. They are currently conducting 3 phase III trials and six more are planned. These are all FDA approved and over 2000 patients are enrolled in the clinical trial programme. The first approved treatment for antineoplastins for the market is expected at the end of 2011.
for an example of an FDA-approved success.
The NCI study from the 90s that failed used dosages far too low (130th of the correct dosages), so no wonder it didnt work!
I really dont see what all the fuss is about. Antineoplastins are not some "magic pill" that will suddenly cure all cancers, they are just another weapon in the arsenal against cancer and have shown improved efficacy and safety as against chemotherapy/radiotherapy in certain types of brain cancer so far. This is positive but by no means "the answer." I think the controversy is because the treatment has been developed by an individual rather than a pharmaceutical company, which is certainly unusual.
Oh, and another thing, the offices of Dr. Burzynski were raided on one or more occaisons and ALL of the medical records were SEIZED. Yet, they did NOT come up with evidence that antineoplastons does not work in the treatment of the cancers noted.
So, people, the FDA and the US Government have scrutinized ALL of the medical records AND even HARASSED former patients to NOT associate with Dr. Burzynski.
Why would they bother with this? Would they spend 30 YEARS of harassing this guy? Because he is onto something big in the field.
Once again, the Phase III trials will put this debate to rest:-).
I'm a beleiver:-).
Probably because he's a snake oil salesman and you're just one of his sheep. The government and pharma aren't out to get you. You're worth MUCH more to them alive than you are dead.
Because he is a damn con artist. We need to keep people alive so they can earn income, pay taxes, buy shit. There is no money in letting cancer patients die.
Let the haters hate. One day they will wake up to the fact that the drug companies and the government and thebig banks and the oil companies are all one and the same. They are anti-truth, anti-human, and so far there are a lot of people still buying their bullshit. That is changing. The tide is turning.
Those criticizing Dr. Burzinski have obviously never met the man, tried the treatment, or even poured over his research. They very likely are not even oncologists. Let them say what they will. I feel a little sorry for people who refuse to open their eyes. The world is beautiful once you see clearly.
Dina made the perfect transition for nutbag conspiracy theorist to nutbag BS-snake oil proponent. Well played lady.
it's your death, GR. Meet it as unawakened as you like.
Dina, if I ever get cancer, I'm going to find a targetted therapy that attacks a known pathway that causes my cancer. A magical mixture of injected urine proteins will be on the bottom of my list.
Those criticizing Dr. Burzinski have obviously never met the man,
So? Why would I need to meet him? I never met Fleming, but that doesnt mean that penicillin doesn't work
tried the treatment,
not being a loony with cancer, no, obviously not
or even poured over his research.
Read the thread. Yes, we have look at the research and it is found wanting.
They very likely are not even oncologists.
One doesn't need to be an oncologist to study the science
Let them say what they will. I feel a little sorry for people who refuse to open their eyes. The world is beautiful once you see clearly.
Or, obviously, if you're clincially insane like you. What meds are you on by the way? Bet they came fromone of those evil 'Pharma' companies you fear so much.
How stupid are you, Americans? Very stupid. But so many!
Just lookiing here and found some strong feelings on both sides, except with very little evidence on either with the exception of a supposed cancer victim or two who claim to have been helped by this therapy - NOT an insignificant claim.
Antineoplastons treatment has been associated with significantly better outcomes than conventional treatments especially with brainstem cancers. "significant side effects" have been enumerated, but did not appear much different or severe that convection treatments of radiation and chemotherapy. There is a YAhoo group for patients who have had antineoplaston therapy or wish to know more. I've joined the group but cannot get immediate access without being 'approved' by the moderator.
I'm just a guy looking for answers - even if they are right in my face I can only see 5% of what's out there so please bear with me.
Sounds like you are being critical of something you know little about, if you've not even seen the movie (which is free to view on the web) The movie, while admittedly one-sided, but it did present some of the conflicting opinions.
The web page that you cite does NOT contain a statement by him that A10 is not effective as a cancer treatment.
He does NOT claim that all peptides will cure cancer, so why are you so down on his having a name for his combinations? To understand his name, you'd need to understand the theory behind his work with these specific peptides.
According to the movie, he is getting a 30% success rate in treatment of cancers that are considered incureable The best that the treatment of radiation and chemotherapy could get was an expected 6 month extension of life.
According to the movie, he actually won most of the court cases against him. In the case that he lost, the effectiveness of his treatment was not admitted as a topic, so using his conviction in any way to condemn his treatment isn't appropriate.
Next time you are paying your health insurance bill, think about this: would you rather pay the high price of chemo and radiation to give a person 6 months of life, or a much smaller bill for antineoplastins for those cases that they can help? If you were to get cancer, would you rather spend 6 months with the side effects of radiation and chemo, or extend your life for several years with a treatment having few side effects?
To Genomic Repairman
You are a complete idiot, as you have obviously not watched the movie. If you had, you would know
that Dr. Burzinski so called snake oil treatments, have PASSED the FDA's Phase ! and Phase !! clinical trials and has been accepted to go ahead with the third and final trial.Once that happens Big Pharma will be totally out the the cancer drugs business. You think they are not aware?
To all the other idiots who have not watched the movie.
Why would the FDA, The National Cancer Society and the American Gov't take Dr. Burzinski to court no less than 5 times and lose everytime? Talk about wasting taxpayers money.
Everybody - Watch the movie before making your idiot comments.
Accepted into Phase III, doesn't mean it has successfully completed Phase III numbnuts.
I agree with the last guy that commented. I think Pharma and the FDA are all about the money here. you said Dr. Bruzinski provided no evidence that his treatments work. Apparently we didnt' watch the same movie, because in the film, the first 30 minutes is all about presenting concrete evidence that the treatments DO work. Also, in the later part of the movie, memos, letters and evidence from the study that the NCI published that actually shows that the NCI diluted the antineoplastons given to patients in their trial so that the treatment woudn't work.
I think the FDA and Texas medical board repeatedly took him to court not because of any criminal wrongdoing but because they are desperate to somehow keep the truth from getting out. Once it does, Dr. Bruzinski's research really will be on the cutting edge of cancer treatment, and a lot of these other guys won't be getting as big a piece of the pie.
I dont' know if I would go as far as using the word "conspiracy", but If you don't believe that America's medical establishment and big pharmaceutical companies aren't in the business of keeping themselves in power and keeping the money rolling in, well then you are pretty naive.
Try doing a bit more research..
maybe you missed out. In the documentary he got to put out his "side" of his story, but his stuff has been proven to have no real clinical benefit, look at the links that Brian has kindly provided above.
Genomic Repairman.. if you think the FDA is out to save lives and help you, you are very very wrong. Radiation kills healthy and bad cells. It's like having weeds in your garden and killing EVERYTHING, in hopes that NO weeds will return and all the flowers will grow back. Chemotherapy TEMPORARILY shrinks the tumor, and once the tumor gets oxygen it explodes and the cancer speads throughout the entire body. If radiation and chemotherapy worked so fucking well, people wouldnt be DYING. There are MANY cures for cancer that are not exposed because the FDA wants to make money off of radiation/chemotherapy. FDA approves things that only harm you... Ever heard of High Fructose Corn Syrup?
I feel really bad for people like you that support such evil corporations. Good luck in life.
Just for your information Genomic Repairman, a drug doesn't make it to Phase III generally if there's nothing there. Phase II weeds out drugs that don't work or have toxic side effects. If there was really no evidence whatsoever of antineoplastons working, then the FDA would not have approved them for Phase III trials. I expect that would be doubly the case after the contentious history between Burzynski and the FDA.
If you don't believe the argument that the FDA simply wouldn't approve the trials, then how about this one: money. It costs an extraordinary amount of money to run Phase III trials-- something like $150 million each. There's no way Burzynski would have been able to raise those kind of funds for the trials if there was no evidence that the therapy worked.
The fact you're completely denying the importance of the drug entering Phase III trials, just indicates you are grasping at straws to try to justify yourself. It looks to me like you've made the classic internet mistake of making a stupid statement, and then gotten stuck making increasingly shrill posts trying to back it up. Now after such a long string of stupidity on your part, it's really hard to eat some crow and admit you were wrong.
Stupid mistake, um if you scroll up, there are links to journal articles that are debunking this shitty thing that is being paraded around as a therapy. Oh and I don't eat crow, I feed off the hate of trolls. Bring me my dinner!
Hey kids, you know, the antineoplastons entry over at wikipedia presents almost the same exact points that we have given in this comments thread. Considering your idiotic ferver here, I'm surprised you haven't edited that entry to better suit your tastes.
As a RN, who administers chemotherpy to patients five days a week, I am appalled at some of the closed minded comments made on this site by supposed intelligent people. A few commenters simply lack maturity as documented by their responses. Either that or they have been spending too many hours closed up in labs and have lost their real compassion for others. How sad. I happened on this site after viewing "the movie." For years I thought I was giving patients, who wanted to live a little longer, a weapon to fight cancer. I am with them every day when they can't eat, they can't feel their fingers or feet, have severe burns from radiation etc. Chemotherapy is poison! I have to wear special gloves and "suit up" to mix or administer these concoctions to my patients. After watching "the movie" I was enraged that our government and NCI would spend many years and millions of dollars attempting to discredit this Doctor rather than actually trying to work with him and find out how and why so many were leaving his clinic alive and well. This is especially true for gliomas. The fact that he has quite a few who are still alive 1-20 years out is absolutely amazing. I have participated in trials and know the ends and outs of pharm. corps. and all of their near hits and misses. Most drugs we now give are OLD discoveries. If you continue your closed minded ways and think you are the only ones with any intelligence, you are not only full of yourself, you will set us back years in research. Everyone wants to be the first to make a disovery but that just can't be. You have to share and try to improve upon the discovery. Unlike all of the pharmaceutical companies, I would gladly give up my career as an Oncology nurse for a cure for cancer. I will support Dr. Burzynski any way I can.
As a scientist who works in the field of cancer therapeutics and who has had experience with clinical trials, I am appalled at the continued pedaling of this so-called cure when even the basics of how it works are so wrong. Burzynski can wage his war of public opinion on this but the war of facts is building a strong body count that is not in his favor.
I have come to the point where I am legally allowed to call myself "master of science", however, my fate in science has never been at an all time low since I graduated. Many of my dilligent fellow students who passed summa cum laude and went on for PhD. positions often seemed to lack critical thought. Sure they could memorize all they needed to know to pass the exams, but when I try to explain to them why it is not wise to in an object recognition task to change the groundplate from a white to a black color in a whitin subject trail in rats (because they were simultaneously testing an computerized scoring system) I get strange looks.
Besides that I have spoken to numerous researchers that would immedeately fit into the "conspiracy corner" as some here propose. Of course it isn't a conspiracy, as their stories make abundantly clear, but a simple matter of incentive. First of all there is an enormous problem with ego in today's research field, where people try to demonize other research (not unlike in a Brian Krueger way). Then there are People that know each other in the business and are happy to return a certain paper in a peer review process to a researcher, so that their buddy has enough time to has his paper (with the same subject) approved by these peer reviewers. It's a money thing and it DOES affect science in a big way.
Now we have a thing like cancer, which is one of the, if not the biggest industry in the world where a lot of people benefit from. I find it absolutely foolish to assume that this industry truly has people's best interests at heart. I'm not saying that people in this industry WANT to "murder" people, not at all. I am saying that if they can create a cure, or a fantastic side effect free treatment that would have people swallowing pills untill the day they die they WILL choose the latter option. If you think otherwise you are quite frankly very naive and probably have zero experience in the field (PhD. or not).
All in all I'm absolutely for clinical testing as I feel it is the BEST way to objectively determine wether something works or not. Then again, I'm not ignorant enough to not know that only big pharmaceutical companies can offord said clinical trials. Also I'm aware of cases where clinical trials have been influenced by subtle and less subtle means to settle for some abstracts and no word of the defendant (which would be Mr. Burzynski in this case). Besides, the fact that his treatment went to phase III is enough for me to refrain myself from calling him a fraud... There is simply no basis for that. On the other hand, there is no scientific proof that says it does work (although I admit that there is enough anecdotal evidence that speaks for him and would have many pharmaceutical companies persue it. Granted they calculated they'd make enough money off of it to at least pay for the clinical trials).
Also Brian, for the love of god do something about your face... Or at least change your profile picture... You look like one of the cum laude guys at my uni who forgot to take into account the freezing point of the substances he was testing and injected rats in so many trials with water instead of the compound (yeah, he was able to remember ice crystals in the test tube but didn't think too much of it). Anyways, that guy was ugly as shit... therefore, change it please.
Here is a link to the movie if you still have not seen it.
Thanks for the link Scott, I've already seen the movie.
Oh and here is a link for everyone on antineoplastons from the world renowned Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, you know people who study cancer...
"There is no conclusive evidence to support the antineoplaston theory. Cancer patients should be cautious when seeking unproven treatments as they delay conventional therapies and can be detrimental."
Just look at the side effects of chemotherapy.
Most patiens would probably ber better off not taking the treatments
And you want to know why the NCI could not "find" and of Burzynski's
Findings? Because if they did the NCI would be no more making a massive loss
for the big pharma corps. Cancer donations in Canada are just unbelieveable
Eg - My old High School (700+ students + staff) for the Terry Fox Run raises $10-20K a year
For having studens from 3 small comunities totalling less than 5000 residents.
The money in so called "cancer research" is somewhat unbelieveable, and the
greed of people is even worse. We need to change how things are run, give
the power to the people instead of treating us like toys and torture these unfortinate
(and i wish i could say few but 1 in every 3 Canadian women will get cancer and 1 in every 2 Canadian men will get cancer) with chemo.
N3M37H, when you copy and paste bullshit non-science out of a canned e-mail, be sure to remove the carriage returns.
Why is chemo so bad? Because its not a targeted therapy. It essentially kills any actively dividing cell. So it kills both good and bad cells. However, the treatment is better than dying, and certainly better than injecting yourself with non-sense like antineoplastons. Cancer is a tough business and patients should seek out the best therapies science has to offer. Antineoplastons are not the answer.
come on guys - REALLY??? watch the damn movie and judge for yourself. This guy is LEGIT.
JUST WATCH THE MOVIE!!!!!!!
Can't cure cancer, heart disease and all the other issues today, the economy would certainly collapse, but thanks for trying.
I just sat and watched the full movie that's available to view for free at www.burzynskimovie.com
And this shows the very real dangers of accepting third hand the opinions of lunatics on the internet.
IF antineoplastons were in fact as ineffective as the blogowner and many of his sidekicks claim, then why would the US Government have stolen his work and illegally patented his products?
Take a look at the movie and decide for yourself.
Won't make time to do that - well fast forward 1hr 40m 25 seconds and spend one minute.
The US Govt not only make claims for their use as a treatment, they also point to it's use as a preventative treatemnt and be amazed to hear the truth about chemo in that patent too
QUOTE: Current approaches to combat cancer rely upon the use of chemicals and radiation that are themselves carcinogenic and may promote recurrences and metatastic disease.
To borrow from a prime time medical curmudgeon and sociopath - You're an idiot.
Saul, you are a fucking idiot and don't know shit about shit
Bob, you are an asshole and don't know when to put periods at the end of declarative sentences.
Suck it bitch!
You pro drug and surgery guys are historically illiterate and retarded. Open a fucking book and get your head out of the sand. PERIOD!
I am kind of unsure about the validity of this treatment, but just before I read about some studies on antineoplastons and some of the results claimed that the antineoplastons DID contribute in reducing the size of the tumor. Some of these apparently did so by being combined with chemotherapy or radiation (and no, not all of these articles were written by Burzynski).
Here is an article from a study done in Japan: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8667595?dopt=Abstract
As you will see, near the end of the article, they say "Antineoplaston A-10 and AS2-1 are less toxic than conventional chemotherapeutics and they were useful in maintenance therapy for cancer patients".
Doesn't this mean that antineoplastons contributed to the reduction of the tumor (even if helped by radiation and/or chemotherapy)?
If anyone is wondering, I am neutral-sided here, I am not for or against Burzynski or the FDA, I'm just trying to find out if there is any truth behind this.
Smoking gun? 1:39 minutes into the video, the patent discussion, having Samid as the inventor, raises eyebrows. The claim by Burzynski that various agencies sought to put him away, while his patents were infringed upon, are interesting points.
We've come to the conclusion that this comment thread has become very circular. This thread will be closed shortly.