Burzynski: The Movie **SKEPTIC ALERT**

AnnNYC

For heaven's sake, this canard of "working for Big Pharma" keeps coming up, keeps being refuted, and keeps coming up again.  (Kind of like the classic tabloid reporter question, "When did you stop beating your wife?"  A question that is in itself a smear.  Or like political "push-polling.")

In case anyone missed it, thenewme stated on another thread on November 30 that she certainly does not and never has worked for Big Pharma!  And that was in response to someone stating as a "fact" that she did!

And MsBliss didn't ask "do you?" (which in itself is kind of annoying, seeing as the matter has been raised and refuted in the past) -- she basically said [and this is not an exact quote, but rather paraphrased so as not to repeat the harshness of the original]: I believe you do, and therefore must dismiss you.

AnnNYC

Again, MsBliss -- is this the research you meant?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100312133712.htm

Very interesting, and very scary.

It's at the University of Maryland Medical Center, which is in Baltimore.

MsBliss

AnnNYC, yes this is the research.  Both my brother and brother in law are oncs and they have been following this work.  They are concerned about the implications.

MsBliss

AnnNYC, then I was wrong.  But I didn't ask nor suggest whether thenewme works for BP, I asked what ties might exist that are bubbling to the surface in all of thenewme's posts.  After all, it was thenewme that started the Burzynski bashing topic in the Complementary Medicine forum.  Anyway, I don't feel that BP is the bad guy, for goodness sake. 

But your statement begs the questions:  how do you have the transcript of my post word for word? The post was edited within minutes of posting.

AnnNYC

It was edited within 240 minutes of your posting!  Four hours later (4 hour time differential between when it says you posted and when it says mods edited).  I copied it, because it upset me.  I just happen to know thenewme doesn't have "ties" of that type -- that she just cares passionately about this.  That's all.

AnnNYC

Interesting -- the authors of the first "microtentacle" study I linked to have also found that lidocaine and tetracaine cause the microtentacles to collapse:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21069453

Of course, the first study was done in cell cultures and in mice, and the second study only in cell culture, but hopefully this will be applicable in some way in people, and it sounds like these authors (Martin, Matrone and colleagues) are making some headway in understanding mets...

Thank you for leading me to these papers, MsBliss.

bluedahlia

I want to live in LA-LA LAND too! 

MsBliss

Yes, AnnNYC, the subject of thenewme's connections should not be indictable, if she has answered the question already then enough said.  I support skepticism, even more, I support the scientific protocol.  This is why the Burzynski docu was so interesting.  It was so tightly footnoted that it could withstand complete cross examination not only in a court of law, but in a court of science.  It was disturbing to me because up until I saw the docu, I had dismissed his science completely.  The same standard of proof applies and the film makers satisfied it to a surprising standard.

Regarding the microtentacle study, you are very welcome.  It is a privilege to share on this forum.  There is a wonderful and descriptive video about the study on youtube.  I think you will want to see this:

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

I don't think I can make the link hot, but copy and paste.

digger

OMG, you guys are freaking paranoid, you know?  Now you think the moderators are posting on the board under false names?  Seriously weird stuff.

bluedahlia

Oh, give me a home where the buffalo roam
Where the deer and the antelope play
Where seldom is heard a discouraging word
And the skies are not cloudy all day
Home, home on the range
Where the deer and the antelope play
Where seldom is heard a discouraging word
And the skies are not cloudy all day

HA!  Found it!

FireKracker

And I thought it was only ME......

bluedahlia

And no, I don't have stocks in deer, antelope or buffalo.

digger

Wait a minute, so does that mean the moderators are now trolls?

bluedahlia

Maaaaaybe someone should tell them!

rosemary-b

Let me get this straight. Someone thinks the mods are posting under other names.There is no need for them to do that. It really makes those who put forth such theories lose their credibility, in my opinion.

Leia

MsBliss, I agree with you completely. I admire your courage on continuing to post on this thread. You're incredible.

Like you, BCO saved me. This board has been great. For me, it was back in 2006, with my 2cm IDC diagnosis. I came here, in disarray. I was overwhelmed. I had CANCER! But back then, they didn't have Complementary or Alternative treatment threads. 

Yet, just reading the regular "Radiation" threads I determined that I would never do radiation. I formed that conclusion from select individuals who had posted who had not done radiation and had done, fine. And I became one of them. And actually, it was my own onc who told me that if I chose not to do the radiation, forget the Tamoxifen. Pretty much useless.

And here I am, 5.5 years later, cancer free. With none of those debilitating side effects of those treatments.  Radiation and Tamoxifen. And Chemo.Although, with my 2cm cancer that was not offered. 

Yet lately, BCO has become something different. I'm becoming one of those driven off of this site. Because I don't hold the PC views. Even on these Complementary and Alternative threads.

I do also believe in surgery as an essential first step in irradicating the cancer. My 2cm IDC was cut out with huge margins. As was my 2004 2cm Leiomyosarcoma cancer.  Although, interesting, for the Leio cancer, I was offered no ancillary treatments. No radiation, no chemo. 

Hmmm. Why not? Both cancers, both 2cm. It is not hard to figure out.  

baywatcher

MsBliss- I have added you as a favorite member. I am very interested in the info that you share.

MsBliss

Dear Leia,

So good to hear you are doing well and thank you for sharing your experience.  Please tell me you have optimized your vitamin D levels!

It is sad that BCO has sunk to the level of having something akin to bullying and banishment on what seems to be trivial, petty little disagreements.  Now something that my neighbor, who is Her2 positive and metastatic said to me several weeks ago makes sense.  I asked her if she went to BCO or any other forums to learn and share and she said that she doesn't do that anymore.  It was draining on her emotionally. I said because you see your sisters lose their battles?  She said no, it was because she didn't feel free to express her true feelings anymore and it was affecting her blood pressure.  I didn't know what she was talking about until yesterday.  That made me sad because I was always so positive about BCO and other forums because they offer us so much.  

Edited for adverbs!

thenewme

Orac has an interesting article today with more information on Burzynski and his bogus treatments.

When "personalized gene-targeted cancer therapy" really means "making it up as you go along" 

"Despite the promotion of the Burzynski Clinic by natural medicine mavens as using "nontoxic" therapies that "aren't chemotherapy," Dr. Burzynski's dirty little secrets, at least as far as the "alternative medicine" crowd goes, are that (1) despite all of the attempts of Dr. Burzynski and supporters to portray them otherwise antineoplastons are chemotherapy and (2) Dr. Burzynski uses a lot of conventional chemotherapy. In fact, from my perspective, it appears to me as though over the last few years Dr. Burzynski has pivoted. No longer are antineoplastons the center of attention at his clinic. Rather, these days, he appears to be selling something that he calls "personalized gene-targeted cancer therapy."

thenewme

The FDA has very specific information about Burzynski's wreckless and unethical practices.  

"...conclude that the IRB did not adhere to the applicable statutory requirements and FDA regulations governing the protection of human subjects."

"The IRB approved research without determining that the following criteria were met: that risks to subjects were minimized ... and risks to subjects were reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits, if any, to subjects, and the importance of the knowledge that may be expected to result ..."

Yikes!  It's ironic that so many Burzynski promoters use "first, do no harm" in their arguments. 

thenewme

Speaking of irony, according to the Texas Medical Board complaint against Burzynski, it appears that Burzynski himself owns the PHARMACY that his clinic prescribes, and without disclosing that to his patients. 

I guess that would make Burzynski part of "Big Pharma?"   Oh my.

Ironic too, that so many alt-med people love to use the conspiracy-evoking phrase "...things your doctor won't tell you..."

thenewme

Texas Medical Board vs Burzynski   Wow, that's quite a list of charges!  It'll be interesting to follow the trial.

- failure to practice medicine in an acceptable professional manner consistent with public health and welfare;

- failure to meet the standard of care;

- negligence in performing medical services;

- failure to use professional diligence;

- failure to safeguard against potential complications;

- failure to disclose reasonably foreseeable side effects of a procedure or treatment;

- failure to disclose reasonable alternative treatments to a proposed procedure or treatment;

- failure to obtain informed consent from the patient or other person authorized by law to consent to treatment on the patient's behalf before performing tests, treatments, or procedures; and

- prescription or administration of a drug in a manner that is not in compliance with Chapter 200 of this title (relating to Standards for Physicians Practicing Complementary and Alternative Medicine) or, that is either not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in human beings or does not meet the standards for off-label use, unless an exemption has otherwise been obtained from the FDA.

- unprofessional or dishonorable conduct that is likely to deceive or defraud the public or injure the public;

- providing medically unnecessary services to a patient or submitting a billing statement to a patient or a third party payer that the licensee knew or should have known was improper. "Improper" means the billing statement is false, fraudulent, misrepresents services provided, or otherwise does not meet professional standards.

-.....breaches of the Texas Health and Safety Code, prescribing/administering a non-therapeutic treatment, dispensing dangerous drugs in a manner inconsistent with public health and welfare and improper billing practices.

bluedahlia

This guy's a real winner!  Wonder if he knows Conrad Murray?

MsBliss

Hi Baywatcher,

I hope we can share with each other the best pertinent info....it will be a pleasure.

All my best,

Bliss

apple

i pay for insurance... car insurance, health insurance, homeowner's insurance, life insurance.  I don't get the idea that taxpayers are paying for my health costs.

perhaps i am wrong.

1Athena1

Taxpayers are - apple - reason's complicated and for another thread. In strictly economical terms the private delivery of healthcare especially for a hi tech illness creates a huge inflationary/fiscal pressure. Will say more but not on my no commas cell phone.



Why don't i have a comma......

suzieq60

Thenewme - thankyou for posting this information - what a crook!!!

scuttlers

My comma is Alt N key. I don't believe my insurance company is costing the tax payers. They show salaries in astronomical numbers to the higher ups in the company. But that is my humble opinion.



This info on "B" is really a horror! I can understand the patient (and family) looking for miracles. The answer is not to be found there. I know that as I progressed through the stages (not BC Stage) since my diagnosis there were periods of bargaining, and some of what can I do to make this better. Even bought a VERY EXPENSIVE juicer that is such a pain to use! Thought the more expensive, the better for me. HA! It is going on Craigslist as soon as I can afford the Vitamix!

Leia

MsBliss,

My last Vitamin D level was 71. That was September, 2011. I was a little disappointed. That seemed low, to me, as a cancer survivor. At one point, in 2010 it was 110. And the report said "Too High" so I was trying to scale it back.  But I think that I went, too far. So, now I am back to 10,000 IUs/day. I'll test again, this month.

Although, in 2006, when I had the breast cancer, my D3 level was 28. And my doc said that was "normal." Haha, what a joke.  That is totally deficient. 

I am rapidly becoming to feel like, your neighbor.  I don't feel like I can express my true feelings, either. 

Yet, I am happy for what I have learned here. Althogh, mostly, for what NOT to do.  

impositive

Ms Bliss, It's very discouraging to see that the mods would edit your post yet let some of the downright utter, meaningless, trollish posts continue to go on here.  It's utter censorship and it does make you wonder who is really behind the scenes.  Attacks to the alt women go on here daily, yet the poster's comments are allowed to remain.  Why aren't those censored or deleted?  If your post was so inflammatory, then why has it been allowed to be repeated and remain in AnnNYC's "cut & paste" post above.  You said nothing more than the rest of us were already thinking. 

Thenewme,why do you get a kick out of antagonizing alt bc women?  You are obviously a staunch "conventionalist."   What do you get out of posting things like this thread on the alt boards?  And dont add injury to insult by saying you want to "help" the newbies.  

Ladies, the ones who are fueling thenewme's fire....Follow me while I go to the conventional boards and post that chemo kills.

Of course I would never do that but that is the equivalent to what is happening here.