New Attack on Dr. Burzynski!

Anonymous · November 2011

Breaking News: New Attack on Dr. Burzynski-New Action Alert!

Alliance For Natural Health

November 14, 2011

Justicia The pioneering cancer doctor is a target once again. But you can help stop the attack.

Stanislaw Burzynski, MD, PhD, is a biochemist practicing in Texas who developed (using his own money) a nontoxic gene-targeted cancer therapy called antineoplastons. It has been shown to effectively help cure some of the most "incurable" forms of terminal cancer.

Dr. Burzynski had tried to get the FDA to review and approve antineoplastons since 1977, to no avail. To make sure he would not get into trouble for using the experimental therapy in his practice, his legal team confirmed that he was acting within the law and could use antineoplastons in his own practice "to meet the immediate needs of patients." But in the 1980s the Texas Medical Board (TMB) charged him with breaking a law that didn't actually exist and tried to revoke his medical license. Numerous investigations later-including an appearance before the Texas Supreme Court-found no violation of any law or standard of care. The TMB came up empty-handed.

We have reported on the TMB's pattern of harassment against integrative doctors a number of times, discussing serious allegations from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the serious attacks on Dr. Bill Rea's work in environmental medicine and chemical sensitivity, and on Texas Governor Rick Perry's involvement in appointing board members who actively harass integrative physicians.

As Dr. Joseph Mercola reported in June of this year, the FDA, the pharmaceutical industry, and the National Cancer Institute all knew how promising Dr. Burzynski's therapy was proving to be. Standard cancer treatment is based on very expensive machines and very expensive toxic drugs. There is an enormous amount of money to be made in this paradigm, and Dr. Burzynski's work single-handedly threatened to overturn much of it. On the other hand, this treatment showed such promise that they wanted to get their hands on it themselves.

So first they tried to copy his invention using a single non-patented ingredient, and when that failed, they tried to steal his patents out from under him. However, they knew they couldn't use the stolen patents so long as he had the ability to defend his rights. So the government spent over $60 million to prosecute him on 75 counts of violating federal law, hoping to tuck him away in jail for the rest of his life.

For the next ten years, Dr. Burzynski was engaged in a lengthy and convoluted legal battle with the FDA. After two trials, he was found not guilty on all counts, and his antineoplastons medication is currently undergoing the FDA approval process. His fight was chronicled in a stunning documentary film, Burzynski: The Movie. More info on the documentary can be found at the film's website, while the movie itself can be viewed online for a limited time.

Now the Texas Medical Board is back. The TMB is making yet another attempt to revoke Dr. Burzynski's medical license which, if successful, would result in the closure of his clinic, the abandonment of all his patients, and would squelch any possibility of antineoplastons gaining FDA-approval.

Using the death of two of his terminally ill patients as a pretext, the TMB is charging Dr. Burzynski with the off-label use of FDA-approved drugs. It must be stressed, however, that Dr. Burzynski uses the drugs off-label in order to tailor the medication specifically to an individual's genetic profile, rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach. Dr. Burzynski takes blood and tissue samples from his patients to form their molecular profile. From that he chooses from wide variety of existing FDA-approved drugs to tailor his gene-targeted therapy to his patient's genetic profile specifically.

Multi-agent targeted gene therapies are the way of future. The American Society of Clinical Oncology has stated that they want to focus on "targeted therapies and personalized diagnosis and treatment" over the next decade. Dr. Burzynski is the only one who is using such a treatment on patients today.

The TMB's complaint concerns a patient who had triple-negative breast cancer, had already undergone conventional cancer treatment without success, and initially felt better after Dr. Burzynski's treatment and was able to return to work. The board is charging Dr. Burzynski over the side effects of his treatment, though they do not seem concerned with the horrible side effects she experienced with the conventional cancer treatments.

The complaint also concerns a patient with estensioneruoblastoma, a cancer so rare that any medication use would have been "off-label" since there is no recognized treatment for this disease at all. The patient lived for five more years and the tumor decreased in size by 40%, but the TMB complaint is charging that the disease actually progressed during his treatment.

The off-label use of FDA-approved drugs is not uncommon, and it is legal. According to the American Cancer Society, a study showed that 8 out of 10 cancer doctors surveyed had used drugs off-label. And half of the chemotherapy drugs used are for conditions not listed on the FDA-approved drug label.

Please take 20 minutes to watch this brand-new video on the upcoming court case, and share it with friends. Not only does it outline the charges involved in this case, but it also gives you a glimpse at a new side of Dr. Burzynski's treatment. You'll be shocked at how flimsy the TMB's case is-and how doggedly persistent the board is in harassing Dr. Burzynski and others like him.

The Texas Medical Board v. Stanislaw Burzynski trial will begin on April 11, 2012. Please write to Gov. Rick Perry, who appointed a number of members of the TMB, including its heads, as well as the House Committee on Public Health and the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services, which oversee the TMB. This is about our right as citizens to choose our own cancer treatment-and not allow decades of important gene-targeted cancer research be flushed down the drain in the name of protecting the profits of an industry that doesn't want Burzynski to survive. Please take action today!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Be sure to check out this 20-minute video update about what Dr. Burzynski currently faces with the charges made against him by TMB (https://http://www.burzynskimovie.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=126).

Anonymous · November 2011

http://www.burzynskiscam.com/index.php

http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2011/11/the-burzynski-clinic-threatens-my-family.html

http://blog.anarchic-teapot.net/2011/11/22/burzynski-piss-poor-cancer-therapy-at-a-hefty-price/

http://www.lymphomation.org/story-kandj.htm

ftp://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/pub/93/93-02071.CV0.wpd.pdf

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/11/a_pr_flack_from_the_burzynski_clinic_thr.php

Here's a quote from gm724 on Orac's bolg :

" If it ducks like a quack...

Consider how a doctor would behave if s/he was truly ethical, truly engaged with scientific method, and had truly come upon a new drug treatment that really worked in curing a life-threatening illness.

The first thing they might try is to pay a lawyer to negotiate an NDA with an established drug company: after all it's not a-priori immoral to seek to earn a reasonable profit for one's work.

Assuming the drug companies all had a bad case of "not-invented-here syndrome," our good doctor might take it to a university. If that failed, he might try submitting whatever results he had (e.g. clinical results, animal studies, whatever) for an informal peer review and to seek out advice: what to do next.

But if it all came down to opening a private clinic to seek to accumulate clinical findings in support of his treatment, then he would:

= Set it up as a legitimate nonprofit.
= Pay himself only the minimum needed to support a reasonable working-class to middle-class lifestyle, somewhere in the range of $40k - $75k/year.
= Keep 100% open books, available online for public inspection.
= Seek out an unpaid board of advisors consisting of reputable doctors and scientists, to review his work and publish their findings, opinions, etc. without any hindrance.
= Publish as much as possible in peer reviewed journals, and
= Respond to skeptics by referring them to the published articles, the open books, and the write-ups from his board of advisors (whose track record could also be checked).
= Be willing to debate the efficacy of his treatment in public, and do so by referring to his published literature.

As it is, he appears to have done quite the opposite on most or all counts."=

Anonymous · November 2011

??????????????????

Anonymous · November 2011

Dental,

I really am at a loss at how to address your post.

Anonymous · November 2011

Dental, Would you be so kind to refer to the the links that I have posted and not the question marks after your post.

Anonymous · November 2011

"We all need to wise up........because if the innocent don't come together then the guilty will continue to win." That was well said, Dental.

Anonymous · November 2011

Ok, I have some time off work. After all I have nothing better to do than fight woo miesters. Present your evidence.

Anonymous · November 2011

This is the insane rambling that I would expect to hear from a mentally ill homeless person on the street.. Seriously, it makes no sense;

Dental wrote:

Dr Thomas Rau has Pancreatic Cancer patients who are survivors after 15 years..........you need to get out of the United States. Or better yet.....wise up to the reality.....look at someone's hospital stay in the US. My daughter's bill was over 30,000 dollars for a two night stay in a NYC hospital. Yes, that included ER care......but the care was so bad we just spent another 30+ thousand for a minor surgical procedure in another hospital to take care of the mistakes from the first situation. What is that well known Bible Verse.......who casts the first stone......remember that? Look at results from reliable sources ( not from those who have most to gain ). We all need to wise up........because if the innocent don't come together then the guilty will continue to win.

Anonymous · November 2011

I think gm734 deserves another posting: If it ducks like a quack...

Consider how a doctor would behave if s/he was truly ethical, truly engaged with scientific method, and had truly come upon a new drug treatment that really worked in curing a life-threatening illness.

The first thing they might try is to pay a lawyer to negotiate an NDA with an established drug company: after all it's not a-priori immoral to seek to earn a reasonable profit for one's work.

Assuming the drug companies all had a bad case of "not-invented-here syndrome," our good doctor might take it to a university. If that failed, he might try submitting whatever results he had (e.g. clinical results, animal studies, whatever) for an informal peer review and to seek out advice: what to do next.

But if it all came down to opening a private clinic to seek to accumulate clinical findings in support of his treatment, then he would:

= Set it up as a legitimate nonprofit.
= Pay himself only the minimum needed to support a reasonable working-class to middle-class lifestyle, somewhere in the range of $40k - $75k/year.
= Keep 100% open books, available online for public inspection.
= Seek out an unpaid board of advisors consisting of reputable doctors and scientists, to review his work and publish their findings, opinions, etc. without any hindrance.
= Publish as much as possible in peer reviewed journals, and
= Respond to skeptics by referring them to the published articles, the open books, and the write-ups from his board of advisors (whose track record could also be checked).
= Be willing to debate the efficacy of his treatment in public, and do so by referring to his published literature.

As it is, he appears to have done quite the opposite on most or all counts."=

nochemo4me · November 2012

The quack is the FDA.

If they cared about your health and not greed from tobacco companies, cigarettes would be taken off the shelves immediately and all tobacco companies raided.

There is not one case where cigarettes improved someones health. Paint, tar in cigarettes and tobacco companies are not raided?

And this poor doctor who has saved tons of lives with documented reports and the FDA wants to get rid of him.

If you want to see the sickest film about the FDA just go to youtube and

type in a cancer cure 40 years ago Dr Burzynski is saving lives...This makes me literally ill!!!!

juniper · November 2012

nochemo: Then the FDA should also work to take artificial sweetners, soda, sugar, most alcohol and countless other things. In this particular case, the FDA is not the problem, Burzynski is.

NattyOnFrostyLake · November 2012

The FDA is involved in a big scandal. Their own employees are suing the FDA for cover ups. The FDA is being criticized by Congress for being a "rogue state" which feels it is above oversight. This came out several months ago.

Burzynski has been vindicated repeatedly. You might want to look at the legal record before categorically making a pronouncement.

Mardibra · November 2012

Bravo Juniper!

NattyOnFrostyLake · November 2012

Mardibra,

Could you be more specific in your bravo? Are you rooting for the artificial sweetners or?

Mardibra · November 2012

Burzynski is a quack through and through. Bilking money from the hopeless. If he is as legit as his supporters claim, he should publish his clinical trial results. That would get the FDA and naysayers off his back. But, he has no results which is why he doesnt publish.

The FDA is legitimately going after him, IMO.

In one of nochemo's 2 posts, she reports that only 3% of people who have chemo survive. Where the heck does that stat come from? Total hogwash. So, pardon my skepticism.

NattyOnFrostyLake · November 2012

Could you come back with some evidence? The name-calling isn't really evidence.

Thanks so much.

Mardibra · November 2012

I cant prove he didnt publish his clinical trial results. I cant prove a negative.

Mardibra · November 2012

try this....

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/02/stanislaw-burzynski-fails-to-save-another-patient

Edited by Mods to make the link clickable

NattyOnFrostyLake · November 2012

You can always read up and check the legal record before stating your opinion. The documentation is all there for your scrutiny. The documentary film will give you leads as to where the legal records can be found. You can go there in order to determine if you have any basis for your opinions.

Actually, you can back up what you say if you have any evidence. But it takes some time. If you want to sound off with any credibility I suggest you document. Not that hard. Seriously.

Busy now. Bye.

itsjustme10 · November 2012

Reputable people don't hid things behind "documentaary films". They publish their studies, and welcome scrutiny of the raw data. They don't give vague "leads as to where the legal records can be found". Science is not a scavenger hunt

Why don't you post all that proof you claim is out there, since you're the one claiming it's true...back it up, and not with some film..with studies and records..

Mardibra doesn't have to prove a negative. You need to prove a positive...that's where the proof supposedly is...let's see the studies that prove what you claim.

Mardibra · November 2012

Nattygroves - How can I possibly provide documented proof of something that Burzynski hasnt documented? As itsjustme stated, YouTube videos do not equate to proof so show ME the science. I would love to read it.

NattyOnFrostyLake · November 2012

Kids, access the court records. Why are you watching youtube and giving your opinions when the legal documentation is there for the finding? Come back when you get evidence, k?

The burden of proof lies with the accuser, remember that from elementary school?

Cheers!

Mardibra · November 2012

you clearly didnt read my link.

Mardibra · November 2012

so here is another link to read about the disgusting behavior...

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/08/16/stanislaw-burzynski-versus-regulations-protecting-human-research-subjects

Edited by Mods to make the link clickable

sweetbean · November 2012

Neither link goes anywhere, mardibra.

Mardibra · November 2012

Thanks mods.

thenewme · November 2012

For anyone interested in reading the actual legal documents pertaining to this case, here's the link:

Texas Medical Board vs Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D.

Use "Guest Account" and search for docket number 503-11-1669.

The red tape and delays in this case are agonizing, and in the meantime, real patients continue to be conned and swindled by this quack. It's a terrible shame.

With regard to Burzynski's infomercial film: In case anyone is interested, I started another thread here on BCO a while back with a "skeptic alert" in the heading, to discuss the bogus "documentary" from a science-based perspective.

marywh · November 2012

Im just curious-Have any of you ever been treated by this man?

evergreen9 · November 2012

I knew a woman, 40-ish, who was treated there, went several times for several regimens for triple negative breast cancer that was Stage 4 from the beginning. She died after five years of fighting, it went to her liver. She swore by his methods, and felt that she lived longer than she would have lived without his help. My sense is that she spent about $100 K on these treatments. She did do all the normal chemo and conventional treatments as well. She was very strict wih her diet, got Vitamin C injections, did electric sauna baths, etc.

I guess no-one can tell whether his treatment played a role, because there is no peer-reviewed study to refer to, no solid research.

I chose not to go down that road. I just feel that if it were that effective, it would be properly documented. Think of all the rich folks wih cancer who would spend millions to live, if there were a "sure thing" out there. I also felt that I would stress myself more searching for the magic bullet. So I chose to go with science. I read a lot, try to eat foods thought to hinder cancer growth (e.g., cabbage family, turmeric, garlic, green tea) and exercise daily. I am grateful for herceptin, and to all the women who have volunteered for research studies in the past. I belong to Dr. Love's Army of Women, and volunteer for studies and surveys when I can.

I guess the bottom line is, we all choose our preferred path, according to our philosophy.

evergreen9 · November 2012

I knew a woman, 40-ish, who was treated there, went several times for several regimens for triple negative breast cancer that was Stage 4 from the beginning. She died after five years of fighting, it went to her liver. She swore by his methods, and felt that she lived longer than she would have lived without his help. My sense is that she spent about $100 K on these treatments. She did do all the normal chemo and conventional treatments as well. She was very strict wih her diet, got Vitamin C injections, did electric sauna baths, etc.

I guess no-one can tell whether his treatment played a role, because there is no peer-reviewed study to refer to, no solid research.

I chose not to go down that road. I just feel that if it were that effective, it would be properly documented. Think of all the rich folks wih cancer who would spend millions to live, if there were a "sure thing" out there. I also felt that I would stress myself more searching for the magic bullet. So I chose to go with science. I read a lot, try to eat foods thought to hinder cancer growth (e.g., cabbage family, turmeric, garlic, green tea) and exercise daily. I am grateful for herceptin, and to all the women who have volunteered for research studies in the past. I belong to Dr. Love's Army of Women, and volunteer for studies and surveys when I can.

I guess the bottom line is, we all choose our preferred path, according to our philosophy.

New Attack on Dr. Burzynski!

Comments

Categories