Cancer Cure?

Dr. Burzynski the Movie Part II

I have posted once before about this doctor and this is the follow-up. He's had an enormous fight with the USA Federal Drug Agency as his method will affect Big Pharmas profits.

5 Replies

  • hi there rod , just goes to show that if you dissect the wheat from the chaff what info you can gain ..... who knows when the dreaded call can come to ourselves or indeed our loved ones ----- but armed with the correct info what can we do !!!!!....alan

  • Once again it comes down to money and who will benefit. not the patients thats for sure. This man is a wonderful human being who went into his profession to help people. Others in the health field and goverments are in it to benefit themselves. where is their humanity. May god help us all and those with this dreaded disease.

  • helvon

    You are right about the motive being money, money, money. If we or people we know have such a disease we want the best possible chance.

    This is a link to Dr Mercola (I know he sells products too but we don't have to purchase) but he gives good advice. It is self explanatory.

  • Hi, Alan!

    There is another side to the argument about Burzynski. I generally lean in favour of the alternative medicine, as long as it has good evidence of some kind, and with Mercola backing B, I tended to agree.

    Before I get down to a little detail, it must be remembered that B does not use anti-neoplastons on their own. He uses common cancer chemo drugs, and these are used in doses and combinations that do not seem to be approved.

    There was a BBC docu recently, which I watched, and it was an eye-opener.

    BBC documentary:

    They did not do a hatch job on him. Initially he refused to be interviewed, and in the end agreed. He seemed to have no answers but what seemed like bluff. Could have been edited out, but the team seemed to be trying to find out what was really going on, and he does seem to be rather underwhelming with evidence.

    The trials have not been published, as I understand it, and have been ongoing for decades. Why no publication?

    One patient who claimed to have been mistreated seemed to be reasonable, and his story was really tragic. It would appear that B fleeced him of a lot of money, and from what I can remember, let them down by not telling them all the info they needed to make a good decision.

    A regular event was patients being told that the cancer getting bigger was just part of the treatment process, and was an indicator of progress, and indicated there would be a response. Several died after being told this...

    A doctor at a local children's hospital was interviewed, and said that they regularly received children who were on their last legs, and needed emergency treatment to keep them alive. She said they were frequently toxic with the salts from over use of the anti-neoplastons. This was extremely convincing - she did not say the clinic should not be there, was in no way extreme, just made the point about what was her area of competent knowledge - serious health problems of those children who had come from the B clinic to her. One child was from the UK - the one in the film, who later died.

    Note there are 2 patient groups:

    Pro - Burzynski Patient Group -

    Anti: The Other Burzynski Patient Group - theotherburzynskipatientgro...

    Both have real stories, and we need to remember that cancer can and does remit spontaneously now and again. Indeed, wait and watch can be a valuable strategy - so it is said by those who know more than I do - eg What Doctors Don't Know.

    I have not managed to view the Burzynski II movie you have linked - as it is not free view anymore.

    I looked for links regarding the Movie II and found the following:

    David Gorsky/Orac - cancer surgeon - writes a blog under the name of Orac.

    Review of Burzynski II:

    DG says of one patient, that to his mind it was malpractice to treat with chemo when simple surgery was a better option for grade I bowel cancer - and he is a cancer surgeon.

    DG said: No, none of it is particularly convincing if you know anything about cancer research. I could change my mind if Dr. Tsuda actually published his results and it turns out that his trial was very well designed, but from seeing him describe them in a propaganda movie like this? Not so much.

    This seems to indicate he would be open if there was good evidence - and so is not just anti alternative medicine.

    Review of Japanese study by DG:

    It seemed B had been vindicated, but this study does seem to be problematic. DG claims it has not been published, though it too goes back a way. Also, the man running it is an anaesthesiologist, not an oncologist, and he too is administering chemo drugs, and these are done in an old fashioned way. DG's valid comment is there is no way you can tell whether the control was well matched with the anti-neoplaston group, nor whether the results could have happened anyway - remissions do happen - even for gliomas, apparently.

    The study itself is on pubmed, from the Kurume Medical Journal:

    It would seem they have published in small journals, and did not make it into a top journal.

    A similar case with the structure of water opened my eyes to this kind of thing. A Japanese scientist claims that water molecules organise themselves according to our words and emotions - beautiful structures for beautiful words, ugly or broken structures for horrible words. He has a book with pictures showing it - seems absolutely convincing until you find out (elsewhere) that he took 100(?) pics per condition, and had artistic people choosing which one to select as the representative picture. As a commentator said, what about the other 99 pics? Any amount of room for personal subjectivity!

    So we need the full peer reviewd facts, and let people scrutinise the details. Neither have published in mainstream journals, and DG goes into possible reasons, commenting they should just try another journal, and stop crying foul after one failure.

    This is not to say that ground-breakers do not always have their results greeted with admiration - I am convinced orthodox medicine is full of hidebound dogmas, but then so can be alternative medicine.

    Personally I would not say that B is wrong, but there are big questions about his ethics and the way he behaves towards patients, and I am beginning to be a lot more skeptical of his anti-neoplaston treatment.

    I do think there are others who have or had good treatments. Gonzalez who followed in the footsteps of Dr Kelley, seemed to have good evidence of response to serious cancer, and also Klenner, who used mega dose vit C, seemed to have good results - not sure he treated cancer generally though, but definitely had good results for serious diseases.

    For what it is worth ...


  • I had read about Dr William Donald Kelley, orthodontist, two days ago. After being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer for which there was no treatment available, with months to live, found a cure for himself through nutrition.

    Dr Kelley's protocol was taken up by Dr Gonzalez with good results.

    Of course, there will still be failures, but the fact that one is told by the conventional bodies that they cannot be cured is enough to look elsewhere.

You may also like...