PDA

View Full Version : Cancer & the Feds: Deadly Serious Business




FrankRep
06-17-2011, 08:59 AM
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/stories2011/07aJune/drb-ap.001.jpg
Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski



The vicious FDA war against Dr. Burzynski and his antineoplaston cancer treatment was exposed to the world in a recently released documentary.


Cancer & the Feds: Deadly Serious Business (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/movies/item/6583-cancer--the-feds-deadly-serious-business)


Alex Newman | The New American (http://www.thenewamerican.com/)
17 June 2011


The story of the U.S. government’s war against Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski and his revolutionary cancer treatment is enough to make anyone’s blood boil. It’s a perfect example of government gone completely wild — and a figurative struggle between a little David and an out-of-control Goliath.

In 1997, The New American magazine ran an in-depth article (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?299061-1997-Article-Free-Market-Medicine) about the doctor, his alternative therapy, and the almost unbelievable campaign of persecution waged by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Now, it’s all recounted in a powerful documentary called Burzynski, the Movie — Cancer Is Serious Business (http://www.burzynskimovie.com/), available for free online until June 20.

The Burzynski saga really begins in the late 1960s, when the young doctor was working on his biochemistry dissertation in Poland. During his research, he identified a previously undocumented strain of natural peptides in human blood and urine. It was enough to spark his interest.

Dr. Burzynski then realized something even more important: Cancer patients seemed to have lower levels of the peptides than healthy people. Eventually, after studying the protein fragments further, he concluded that they actually play a role in controlling the disease. So he called them "antineoplastons” and set up shop in Texas (http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/).

After decades of treating thousands of seemingly hopeless cancer patients, Dr. Burzynski has now succeeded in convincing a great number of other doctors and experts about the value of his discovery. That’s where the documentary begins.

The first 30 minutes or so sets out to establish the success of Dr. Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy — particularly when measured against the outcomes of traditional cancer treatments like chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. The segment features interviews with some of Dr. Burzynski’s patients and their families, medical data on the efficacy of his approach, testimony from other medical professionals, and more.

“I was astounded,” notes long-time supporter Dr. Julian Whitaker in an interview. “Dr. Burzynski had MRIs of brain tumors, known to be almost universally fatal, that had simply disappeared. It was obvious to me that Dr. Burzynski had made the most important discovery in cancer treatment — ever. It’s what we have been looking for.”

A lot of cancer patients treated with antineoplastons offer similarly glowing reviews throughout the film. So do their families. But then the story begins to turn ugly.

When Dr. Burzynski fled to America from communist Poland in 1970, he was hoping to find freedom to carry on his work. Advancing and conducting serious research back home after refusing to join the Communist Party was quite difficult, to say the least. Unfortunately, Dr. Burzynski never could have imagined that he would endure more government tyranny at the hands of the U.S. “justice” system than he ever had in his native land.

But before going in to the real battle, the documentary highlights some astounding facts and figures. The U.S. government’s National Cancer Institute has an annual unconstitutional budget of more than $5 billion. Much of that money is showered on giant pharmaceutical companies, which have so far failed miserably in terms of treating and curing cancer.

Meanwhile, Dr. Burzynski, who according to the data provided in the film has successfully treated nearly every form of the disease, does not receive a single cent. And because the regulatory red tape requires many millions of dollars to successfully navigate, just conducting clinical trials has been quite a mission. But that’s just the beginning.

Dr. Burzynski, his patients, and supportive scientists and doctors have been trying to get the FDA to cooperate in testing and approving the use of antineoplastons since 1977, when he set up his independent practice in Texas. Instead, the agency decided to wage a ruthless and costly campaign in an effort to bury Dr. Burzynski and his treatment.

The persecution started in the mid 1980s with the Texas Board of Medical Examiners, which attempted to revoke Dr. Burzynski’s license to practice medicine. They failed. But the years of state-level harassment, investigations, and court proceedings — which were eventually discovered to be the result of pressure from the FDA — were only the start of the doctor‘s problems with authorities.

Next came the open assault by the federal government. First the FDA filed a civil lawsuit against Dr. Burzynski trying to shut down his clinic and prevent his patients from receiving their medicine. The agency warned the judge that if the court would not grant the injunction it was seeking, the federal government would be forced to use “less efficient” methods to shut down Dr. Burzynski — methods like propaganda, raids, and even criminal prosecution.

After failing to squash Dr. Burzynski in civil court, the feds took their war to the next level. The first grand jury was convened in 1985 in an effort to get an indictment. As part of the new strategy, the FDA raided Dr. Burzynski’s clinic and seized all of his patients’ medical records. They failed to get an indictment.

The next year, prosecutors seized more “evidence.” Still no indictment. In 1990, yet another grand jury was convened. And once again, it refused to indict. Then another grand jury. No indictment. And then another. At no point did the FDA claim that antineoplastons were not safe or effective.

After failing to get an indictment with at least five grand juries, however, the federal government and the cancer industry were really getting frustrated. The FDA began issuing subpoenas to anyone and everyone associated with Dr. Burzynski: other doctors, patients, and even journalists who had written favorably about Dr. Burzynski and his work. Finally, in 1995, Congress stepped in.

“In my opinion, you have every right to use the investigative authority and the judicial resources of the federal government to the justice department convene a grand jury, that’s very appropriate, the first time, perhaps even the second time,” Rep. Joe Barton told the FDA Commissioner during a hearing of the House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee shown in the documentary. “It becomes questionable the third time. The fourth time and the fifth time, it is not, I think, an illogical conclusion to think that the FDA has a vendetta against Dr. Burzynski, or wants to retaliate for some reason.”

FDA boss David Kessler appeared uncomfortable. But Rep. Barton kept piling it on: “How many grand jury investigations have to occur that result in no finding of fault before you as commissioner of the FDA would encourage those within your organization to cease and desist?” Kessler never did answer the question.

Then another Congressman at the hearing chimed in. After confirming that there had indeed been at least four unsuccessful attempts to get a grand-jury indictment, the committee member says: “I am left then, with rather strong inference, that if you convene four separate grand juries and there is no indictment returned — not withstanding that prosecutors tell us always that it’s possible to indict a ham sandwich — that probably there’s not much there.”

A lot of Dr. Burzynski’s patients testified at the hearing, too. “What the classical conventional medicine had to do for me was there — nothing,” noted an obviously distraught middle-aged man who had been treated with antineoplastons. “For me, the next thing was the minister. I did not want to undergo chemotherapy — which I had a new name for, ‘kill ‘em therapy’ — or any type of radiation.”

He also praised Dr. Burzynski and blasted the FDA. “I was extremely lucky that I found Dr. Burzynski. And I don’t want the FDA to take this right from me,” he said. “I came eighteen years ago from Communist Romania, and the tyrant dictator Ceauscescu never stopped a doctor from treating anybody. How can we have something like this in the United States?”

Similar stories of hope and outrage abound. In an interview with TNA for the 1997 piece, Jack Kunnari also shared his family’s tale. Kunnari’s young son Dustin was diagnosed with a type of brain cancer that is normally fatal within a few months. But six weeks after the boy began antineoplaston treatment under Dr. Burzynski, brain scans showed the tumor was completely gone. When it reappeared a year later, the dosage was increased, and the tumor once again receded. By mid 1997, it was still in remission — all with no harmful side effects.

“Initially, your son has a brain tumor, so you're down and feeling pretty bad about things,” Kunnari told TNA’s Robert Lee. “Then you find out about this doctor and you get a feeling of hope; the MRI looks good, and your hope increases. And then the government steps in and says you can't have the treatment." Needless to say, the Kunnari family stood by Dr. Burzynski during his battle against the government.

Other patients and family members offered similarly moving testimony throughout the 1995 congressional hearing excerpted in the documentary. But the FDA remained unmoved. And about a week later, it finally got the indictment it was seeking.

The jury, however, refused to convict. And yet again — despite having already squandered an estimated $60 million in taxpayer money on the trial — the FDA refused to back down.

The battle continued to rage. But finally, after a second trial, Dr. Burzynski was acquitted of all charges. Eventually the FDA even granted him proper permission to provide his medicine to patients in clinical trials.

Today, Dr. Burzynski’s battles continue — trying to bring his medicine to the international market is tough with the overpowering bureaucracy and the trillion-dollar cancer industry fighting it every step along the way. But for now, it appears that he won’t be risking several lifetimes in prison just for operating his business and providing his medicine to willing patients.

More and more people are learning about it, too. The documentary had already been viewed by almost 400,000 people just a few days after being made available for free online. And it’s receiving widespread praise from other reviewers.

“It's an absolute jaw-dropper,” wrote Dr. Joseph Mercola (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/11/burzynski-the-movie.aspx), who runs a website dealing with health freedom and other topics. “For anyone who has ever been affected by cancer, either directly or indirectly, the facts presented in this film will hit you like a rude slap in the face.”



http://vimeo.com/24821365



Get the DVD!

Burzynski, the Movie: Cancer Is Serious Business (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003X3CF68/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B003X3CF68&linkCode=as2&tag=libert0f-20)



SOURCE:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/movies/item/6583-cancer--the-feds-deadly-serious-business



Related Article:

1997 Article - Free Market Medicine (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?299061-1997-Article-Free-Market-Medicine)

The FDA assault against Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski and his cancer treatment based on antineoplastons shows why America needs a free market in medicine. By Robert W. Lee

FrankRep
06-17-2011, 09:01 AM
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/stories2011/00columnists/walter_williams.jpg



The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) policies have led to the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans.


FDA: A Killer Agency (http://www.thenewamerican.com/component/k2/item/5407-fda-a-killer-agency)


Walter Williams | The New American (http://www.thenewamerican.com/)
09 February 2011

buck000
06-17-2011, 09:44 AM
'Course, then, there are articles like this (http://www.houstonpress.com/2009-01-01/news/cancer-doctor-stanislaw-burzynski-sees-himself-as-a-crusading-researcher-not-a-quack/)... I'd love for this Dr. to have the cure, since my father has liver cancer, but the article does raise some questions.

Dr.3D
06-17-2011, 09:46 AM
People should be able to decide for themselves if they want to try some particular "unproven" cure.

FrankRep
06-17-2011, 10:06 AM
'Course, then, there are articles like this (http://www.houstonpress.com/2009-01-01/news/cancer-doctor-stanislaw-burzynski-sees-himself-as-a-crusading-researcher-not-a-quack/)... I'd love for this Dr. to have the cure, since my father has liver cancer, but the article does raise some questions.


Dr. Joseph Mercola is excited about what's happening.


Cancer: The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down... (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/11/burzynski-the-movie.aspx)

Dr. Mercola
June 11 201

Zippyjuan
06-17-2011, 11:52 AM
Yes, it is a potentially deadly business. People should look into the success rate of this "cure". In 1982, the Ontario, Canada health ministry took a look at this. They contacted Dr. Bruzynski's clinic which provided patient files for them to examine. These are not cases selected by the ministry- but by the clinic so if there was a bias one would expect it to be in the favor of cured patients. But what they did find is that 32 out of 36 died within a year. Another died within the next year with one "stabilized" and the two survivors still had cancers. Before you try something, see if it works- especially if your life depends on it.

http://www.cancer.org/Treatment/TreatmentsandSideEffects/ComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine/PharmacologicalandBiologicalTreatment/antineoplaston-therapy

In 1982, consultants to the Ontario (Canada) Ministry of Health visited Burzynski's clinic and reviewed records of twelve patients selected by Burzynski from among the thousands he had treated. According to the OTA report, the Canadian doctors "found no examples of objective response to Antineoplastons." In 1985, the Canadian Bureau of Prescription Drugs examined the records of Canadian doctors who had treated patients at Dr. Burzynski's clinic in Houston. Of 36 patients, 32 had died without showing signs of improvement. Of the remaining 4, one patient died after slight improvement, while one patient died after stabilizing for a year. The 2 remaining patients had widespread cancer.

The National Cancer Institute also examined cases, again provided by Dr. Bruzynski.

In 1991, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) reviewed several 'best cases' (involving patients with brain tumors) chosen by Burzynski. According to a 1992 article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, "two NCI extramural investigators independently reviewed the case histories of some patients treated with antineoplastons. At the investigators' recommendation, the NCI examined the case histories, pathology slides, and imaging studies from seven patients with primary brain tumors ….[T]he site visit team and, subsequently, the [NCI] Division of Cancer Treatment's Decision Network Committee believed that evidence of possible antitumor effect was demonstrated." NCI concluded that these results warranted further investigation through clinical trials at other medical centers. But because of disagreement between NCI researchers and Burzynski, the clinical trials were terminated in 1995. By 1999, the researchers concluded that only 6 of the 9 patients treated in that study could be evaluated according to the study's initial requirements. None of the 6 showed evidence of tumor shrinkage. The researchers noted, however, that the small number of patients participating limited their ability to say with confidence that antineoplaston treatment had no benefit. Side effects of antineoplaston treatment included temporary sleepiness and confusion, and worsening of epilepsy (seizures) in patients who already had that problem (as a result of the tumors).

FrankRep
06-17-2011, 12:25 PM
Yes, it is a potentially deadly business. People should look into the success rate of this "cure".


Yet, his now cancer-free patients are loyal supporters now.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCXPFelC7_E&feature=player_profilepage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiV_Z7CdYyM&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kdg2BFXEzns&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrifZ6Ry4ZY&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/user/burzyn#p/u/7/GrD6DXrB6rw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDlQzvcJJD0&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0DO3MTCvnI&feature=player_embedded

Zippyjuan
06-17-2011, 12:37 PM
Why does he not say any sort of success rate? He only ever says "some". From another alternative doctor Andrew Weil:
http://www.cancer.org/Treatment/TreatmentsandSideEffects/ComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine/PharmacologicalandBiologicalTreatment/antineoplaston-therapy

Although some proponents of antineoplaston therapy have suggested that the reviews of this treatment by conventional cancer specialists are biased by mistrust of alternative therapies, even some prominent figures in the field of alternative medicine have reservations about antineoplastons. According to Dr. Andrew Weil, "Over the years, Dr. Burzynski claims to have treated more than 8,000 patients, but his success rates are unknown. His Web site states only that he has helped 'many' people. If antineoplaston therapy works, we should have scientific studies showing what percentage of patients treated have survived and for how long, as well as evidence showing how Dr. Burzynski's method stacks up against conventional cancer treatment…. Until we have credible scientific evidence showing what antineoplastons are, how they act in the body, and what realistic expectations of treatment with them might be, I see no reason for any cancer patient to take this route."

Is his treatment- or is it something else?

During the 1980s, the United States Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) reviewed medical journal articles describing cases of cancer patients whom Dr. Burzynski had treated with antineoplaston therapy. Its report, published in 1990, concludes that, "Despite a substantial number of preliminary clinical studies published by Burzynski and his associates describing outcomes among the patients he treated with Antineoplastons and an attempt at a 'best case' review, there is still a lack of valid information to judge whether this treatment is likely to be beneficial to cancer patients." The OTA report criticized Burzynski's research process and noted that his definitions of advanced cancer and of complete and partial cancer remission were not used in accordance with generally accepted definitions. One example they pointed to was a patient said to have had a complete remission after treatment with antineoplastons. The report concluded, however, that this claim was inappropriate because the cancer had been removed by surgery before the antineoplaston treatment was started.

echebota
06-17-2011, 12:52 PM
In the movie, they provide statistics from the FDA controlled studies on Brain cancer patients. Radiation/Chemo resulted in 9% success rate and Burzynski approach delivered 25% success rate. The case is considered a success if the patient stays alive for at least 5 years after treatment. All standard approach patients were left with scules burned and deformed for life, children lost the growth hormone so they stay in the child body for life, and all of them suffer and some later die from radiation related deceases. The Burzynski patients - adults and kids - had none of these side effects and led normal life.

But this is the most difficult to cure form of cancer. For other types of cancer the success rate for Burzynski patients is from 30% to 50%, which is better then with traditional treatment and again with no long term side effects.

My guess, that Burzynski does not put the success rates on a web site because of legal reasons. If you come to his clinic, all necessary statistics would be presented to you.

But all this is irrelavent. The point is people should have a choice and FDA should go f.ck themselves :) Let everybody decide for themselves.

Zippyjuan
06-17-2011, 12:58 PM
The Mayo Clinic attempted to replcate the Dr's study and did not get similiar results.
http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/69121.cfm

Nine patients with anaplastic astrocytoma or glioblastoma multiforme recurring following radiotherapy participated in this study. They received increasing doses of antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 by intravenous injections to a daily dose of 1.0g/kg for A10 and of 0.4g/kg for AS2-1. Three patients discontinued treatment due to serious adverse reactions and follow-up scans revealed tumor progression. Scans from the remaining six patients also showed tumor progression during treatment that lasted between 16 and 66 days. Adverse reactions including somnolence, confusion, and exacerbation of underlying seizures were observed in five patients but were reversible. Although survival was not an end point of this study, eight patients died due to tumor progression before the trial was closed two years later. Definitive conclusions could not be made from this study due to the small sample size.

dannno
06-17-2011, 02:26 PM
Yes, it is a potentially deadly business. People should look into the success rate of this "cure".

Well this really isn't difficult to solve, let's simplify things. Burzynski performed tests on people and found that those with cancer were deficient in something. He made more of that something, gave it to people, and it completely reversed and cured some people with very bad cancers.

It's very difficult to look at the evidence and say that something else cured them, or they were cured on their own. Obviously his cure worked, the question is why? What about these patients made this cure work for them? What about the patients who died made the cure NOT work for them? It seems like it would be something important to study, yet the FDA for some reason actively went against looking into it further.

V4Vendetta
07-14-2011, 04:50 AM
Full Movie about Burzynski here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBUGVkmmwbk

V4Vendetta
02-06-2012, 09:51 PM
bump

roho76
02-06-2012, 10:03 PM
Zippy I swear you're some Big Pharma shill. There isn't a medical post on this forum that you don't have your hands all over. It's one thing to have an opinion but to rattle all these treads with your nonsense is ridiculous. Always standing on the side of Big Pharma and Big Medicine. Why do you hate health freedom and peoples right to be able to chose for themselves?

EDIT: Just realized when this thread was from. My criticism still stands.

Zippyjuan
02-07-2012, 03:06 PM
I don't hate freedom- just trying to get accurate, supported information. Asking for supporting proof is ant- freedom? Knowledge is freedom. Only with complete inforamtion can you make a free choice.

Magicman
02-07-2012, 03:34 PM
I don't hate freedom- just trying to get accurate, supported information. Asking for supporting proof is ant- freedom? Knowledge is freedom. Only with complete inforamtion can you make a free choice.

Accurate, supported information as long as its against his poisonous, establishment options that he serves as a pharma shill...

I have yet to hear one criticism from him on Chemotherapy or artificially poisoned products after all of his rants on Vitamin B17, vitamin C, raw milk, natural water, etc. I mean this guy was telling us that Mercury is safe in vaccines.

roho76
02-07-2012, 03:44 PM
I don't hate freedom- just trying to get accurate, supported information. Asking for supporting proof is ant- freedom? Knowledge is freedom. Only with complete inforamtion can you make a free choice.

Using the same Big Business institutions as the movie is trying to discredit is not using "accurate, supported information" to refute the claims made in the movie.

The fact is the FDA as well as most of the Big Pharma/insurance/health institutes you reference are all part of the status qou who actively try to suppress attempts at health freedom. Even going far as to using the enforcement arm of the medical industry (FDA) to imprison and demonize innocent citizens. I don't know how you can use them to make your case.

Besides, health freedom doesn't require evidence from experts or their federations.

FrankRep
08-11-2012, 06:02 AM
Bump, its been a while.