Antineoplaston Cure for Cancer - Dr. Burzynski

Maybe I'm mixing up him with someone else but I thought diet has been a part of his treatment for some time now.

I guess I'm just sorta giving him the benefit of the doubt here because I'm well aware of how the medical community hides the truth from patients.

I'm actually currently curing what I was told was "incurable" with a special diet of my own.

Your most likely right in the end it seems tho

 

I'm with you on the way that the medical community can act, I have food sensitivities that are only just being recognised here in the UK. The extent of wheat sensitivity for example is wildly underestimated in the population of the world. Half of the people I know who have regular bad backs and sore joints could stop them in a week by abandoning gluten. Bad stomachs, depression, tiredness. Some people just get one symptom, like depression, and never relate it to being a food that could create it. I just need one sandwich and the following day I'm depressed and tired until about 12, it does a lot of strange things you wouldn't expect: anxiety, light sensitivity, headaches....

Ohhhhhhhhh god I could eat a sandwich....something nice. No meat, not too much relish. For choice I would go for fries, egg, a few fried mushrooms, tomato, a few fried onions. Damn your eyes Mr Gluten...

MelT

 

Haha oh yes I understand that well. I haven't had gluten or anything tasty even in over four months.

I used to bake my own bread all the time too. Nothing would make me happier than tearing into a fresh loaf straight from the oven. Screw meat and everything else I just want some good bread!

 

Don't...good bread, fresh and warm, the stuff you can rip into with your teeth like an animal. A touch of butter maybe. That slightly crunchy outside and that wonderfully soft insides...sigh.......

You used to do bread? I like cooking but I can't do good bread, I think it's something you're born with, seriously. My wife does great pastry, I can't do pies like she does, she has that touch and I don't. I'm good on cakes and puds though - except that I can't have them now....life is cruel

MelT

 

Yeah bread has always been one of my favorite foods. Sort of a family thing I guess. People always joke about only eating bread at restaurants but me and my brother would munch it all the time.

And fortunately another of my brothers became a professional chef, and a damn good one too. I had him teach me and then never stopped

Hahaha unfortunately it turned out not to be good for me. As you said... Life is cruel

 

Because a lot of people say a lot of things. All that counts is proof, and the integrity of the man making the claims. In the case of Burzynski, neither is present, he is simply fleecing those in the most awful of situations.

Forget the FDA and all he says about it, it's a bluff, he's making millions a year just doing what he is now, he really he doesn't care. Go and read the Burzynski scam site, set up by people who have been through his trial. I'll post a little of it below. These are the first thoughts of a couple going to his clinic for the first time.

"...We were a little taken aback when we arrived and the “clinic” was a “suite” on the second floor of a 3 story building. Hmmmm…I tried to pass it off. When you want so hard to believe something, sometimes you end up listening to your heart and not your head. Next came our meeting with the doctors…it went well. Dr. Burzynski personally assured us that he had had success with this particular type of cancer. “Two months” he said, “and we'll see a difference.” Then it was time to go see the Insurance Coordinator. Whoa! Granted, the first visit wasn't that bad. She asked for the initial upfront money we knew we were going to need to pay. However, from that day forward, this was our life:

• Office Visit
• Simple checkup by the nurse, using what we considered to be sub-standard equipment
• Doctor visit (not Burzynski, never saw him again)
• Addition of medication
• VISIT TO THE INSURANCE COORDINATOR TO HEAR HOW MUCH WE WOULD BE CHARGED FOR THE ADDITIONAL MEDICATION. We were told over and over again “this is upfront, out of pocket, but I'm trying to get the insurance company to pay on it.” We have good insurance, one of the best.

These meds did not cost hundreds of dollars, but thousands!
I'll spare the gory details, but when all was said and done:

• We were out almost $20,000 to the clinic
• We were out money for accommodations since the Burzynski Clinic is an outpatient facility
• We were out money for travel expenses
• AND, after we got home and started figuring up all the medications they had put him on and how much it would cost us to keep him on them, we nearly choked on our tongues when it added up to almost $30,000.00 per month!

You would think that is as bad as it could get…but NO!!! After we decided there was no possible way we could afford to do this we called the clinic to see how we might start weaning him off the medicine prescribed by Burzynski Clinic. WE WERE NOT TRANSFERRED TO A NURSE OR DOCTOR, BUT TO THE INSURANCE COORDINATOR!!! We never received any information from them with instructions on how to come off the meds. We ended up calling our local pharmacist and he was able to help us out...."



So WISMAD, sandwiches? What's your preference if you could have anything at all? Do any cooking yourself?

MelT

 

Nice We were brought up on a lot of bread too, it's very gratifying isn't it?

Keep going with it, even if it's only ever going to be for other people, it's a shame to stop.

MelT

 

You can make bread with flour besides wheat flour. There are nearly gluten free flours, such as spelt.

 

I know, but unfortunately I seem to react to all of them, and avenine in oats too, and most kinds of nuts. Lucky I don't eat much anyway...

MelT

 

Everyone? You mean those who think that weed should be made legal. There's a world of difference between the legislation on soft drugs and the FDA clamping down on someone who has continued to show that he is dishonest and without morals when it comes to money.

Remember that the FDA initiated his research, and the government paid for it, later offering millions for a proper investigation. They were absolutely %100 enthusiastic about what he said he had found, the NCI were too. Then things happened and Burzynski became more and more obstructive when it came to revealing data. If you follow the entire story over the last 30 years you can see how much he doesn't want the trials to end, he's on too much of a good thing with them.

Then again, he wants to fail, that's the game. He wants the FDA to be seen to be placing him under much tighter scrutiny than other researchers, because that adds to the sell, and the idea that he's got a miracle drug that's being held back from the public by big business and the FDA. It's lies and a smoke-screen to divert potential patients away from what's going on. " Look how much 'the establishment' hate us - they're trying to stop you knowing the truth. Only we can help you!!"

It's the same, sad trick that's been used by every quack remedy from reiki to pendulums and crystals. Him purposely inciting the FDA to be the bad guy in all this is a clever twist, but that will not continue to work for him much longer. Hopefully April will see him slapped so hard his ears ring.

He's created his own fuss at the FDA, purposely, so that he never gets to finish his clinical trails and continues to make a fortune because of the alternative advertising it gives him. He and people in his own camp have helped sabotage his progress, purposely, to ensure that the millions a year he makes keep rolling in.

As I've said, I don't care the FDA is the most corrupt organisation ever, Mr B and his actions deserve to be monitored very closely at all times by them and I think they're doing a tremendous job doing to him what they are now. He has to be stopped and brought to justice.


MelT

 

Looks like someone has a hard time accepting the truth...

 

Those studies prove that antineoplastons are not a miracle drug. Sure the FDA is giving them a hard time...that proves nothing about their effectiveness. I think other research is doing well too and that it's not worth it to obsess with antineoplastons.

 

I don't find it compelling at all, there is far too much evidence to show that he is a quack who needs watching very carefully, more carefully than an average research institute.

None of the above are peer-reviewed papers, they're submissions of findings that are unverified by outside sources. The NCB is a clearing house for new research abstracts and journals, it only checks them for editorial style and whether or not the files are submitted in the right format, not for the validity of the research.

Nobody has to been able to repeat any favourable finding concerning antineoplastones except researchers who are affiliated to Burzynski and, in those case (such as in the submissions above), where they are a standard component of chemotherapy (and always have been) and where radiation is used in conjunction with them.

This is an excellent article written by a reputable source who talks about the false claims of the film and the clinic. Science-Based Medicine » Stanislaw Burzynski: Bad medicine, a bad movie, and bad P.R.

"...In fact, none of the currently open antineoplaston trials are phase III trials, which are the type of trial that can potentially give a definitive answer about a therapy, because phase III trials are randomized, controlled trials. The only phase III trial listed is A Randomized Phase 3 Study of Combination Antineoplaston Therapy [Antineoplastons A10 (Atengenal) and AS2-1 (Astugenal)] vs. Temozolomide in Subjects With Recurrent and / or Progressive Optic Pathway Glioma After Carboplatin or Cisplatin Therapy. It's a small trial (only 70 subjects) and appears at first glance to be underpowered to detect anything but very large differences in outcomes. I realize that many of Burzynski's trials date back before the database used in ClinicalTrials.gov was active, but come on! Sixty-one clinical trials since the 1990s, with the end result being only one phase III trial, and that phase III trial hasn't even started yet? And most of the phase II trials of “unknown” status and only one of them listed as “completed” (with that one apparently not having been published)? That's a failure in my book. No drug company or researcher would keep doing trials of a drug (and, yes, antineoplastons are drugs when used this way) with such an abysmal track record. A drug company would give it up as unpromising, and a university researcher would soon find he could no longer secure funding for more trials...."

MelT: The reason why it hasn't been given up is that he makes a fortune conducting trials. Why should he want them to stop?

You know what you call a drug that works on “close to 100 genes”? I don't know either, but you don't call it a “targeted” therapy unless all those genes are genes affected by the single target being inhibited. In other words, Burzynski is trying to have it both ways. He's administering chemotherapy to patients on clinical trials and charging them for the privilege, but he's trying to represent his treatment as being somehow “targeted.” Worse, despite Burzynski's representation of his therapy as being “nontoxic,” in contrast to chemotherapy, some of his antineoplaston preparations are quite toxic.

The reason is two-fold: (1) high doses of antineoplastons are required; and (2) some antineoplaston preparations are very sodium-rich. Dr. Burzynski's therapy requires the adminstration of so much antineoplaston as sodium salts that several of his patients developed hypernatremia, in one case as high as 180 mEq/L. (A normal serum sodium level ranges between 135 and 145 mEq/L.) Personally, I've never seen a sodium level that high in a living patient. When sodium levels get into the 155 mEq/L and up range, clinicians start to get very worried and usually start aggressive treatment to bring the sodium levels down. Worse, these are patients with brain cancer. One danger is that, in correcting the hypernatremia, sometimes cerebral edema (brain swelling) will result. In a patient with a brain tumor, cerebral edema could be even more dangerous than in a patient without such a tumor. Despite reviewers being alarmed at the hypernatremia some of Burzynski's patients developed, astoundingly he still claimed that he had no “significant toxicity.”

Repeat after me: Antineoplastons are chemotherapy. Worse, they're chemotherapy that almost certainly doesn't work against cancer. At best, looking at the evidence, I conclude that they might have very minimal anticancer activity, and even that's doubtful..."

MelT