Quoted message said:Subject: The thing about cancer.
From: "Peter Moran" [email hidden]
Date: 3/4/2004 12:42 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
<[email hidden]>
"Bew" <qw@nonamewhatsover> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Exactly why it is pointless trying to even discuss the issues , I can just
as easily tell you that the story below is a load of [censored] and equally you
can't prove me wrong . Everyone has different experiences and different
beliefs , I tell you about a person who used apricot kernels to cure
cancer
Quoted message said:, you tell me that is [censored] . You tell me about some dude who has
supposedly
Quoted message said:spent 15 years working with cancer patients who hasn't seen any
alternative
Quoted message said:methods work , I say to you that may easily be so because he probably has
never looked , so I say his viewpoint is [censored].
What is the point of the discussion ? , just to go around in circles ?
You won't convince me that what I have experienced and seen isn't true and
I
Quoted message said:will never convince you to change your point of view .
That is why we need to have systematic data - i.e meaningful figures as to
the true results in, ideally, accurately diagnosed and staged cases. It so
happens that what systematic data we have strongly supports my position,
not yours.
For example
The Bio-Medical centre in Tijuana (using Hoxsey methods, vitamins, diet ,
thyroid extract and herbs)) treated 149 patients with mostly fairly advanced
cancer in 1992. Only 17 of these could be found alive five years later.
About what you might expect with the conventional treatments most such
patients also received.
The Livingstone-Wheeler clinic in San Diego treated 193 cancer patients in
1992 with "mostly" advanced cancer and only 28 were still alive five years
later.
The LEF centre did an informal survey of their shark cartilage customers
and were unable to find any who were clearly benefited by it.
Of 95 advanced (Stage 1V) melanoma patients treated by the Gerson clinic,
only seven were still alive at five years. They had no survivors at all
among those with visceral secondaries.
That is before you even look at the large number of more formal trials that
have been performed by conventional medicine into strongly promoted
"alternative" methods. They include orthomolecular methods a la Hoffer,
Vitamin C, Laetrile, shark cartilage, Di Bella, etc.
All this does not exclude some small effect from alternative methods. But
I ask you: "Does it justify all the overblown hype? How does it sit
beside relentless, vicious and often frankly lying attacks upon conventional
treatments which actually have measurable cure rates, and extremely high
ones for many cancers.?
Do you not yet understand why it is that those offering "alternative"
treatments of cancer choose to rely on testimonial, anecdote, rumour, and
hearsay, rather than opening their books to full examination? Go also and
study the history of medicine and see how exactly such judgements as you
have chosen to make above, on the limited "evidence" that you choose to
believe, have thrown up innumerable useless treatments.
What I want is for every cancer patient using an "alternative" treatment to
ask those offering it: "How many patients like me have you treated and what
happened to them?". It is their absolute right to know this. Such
pressure from cancer patients and, hopefully, from any "alternative"
supporters who sincerely want to get at the truth of things would soon weed
out the worst of the cancer quacks. Everyone knows there are plenty of
them.
(References available)
Peter Moran
We've discussed this previously. The truth is *organized medicine* will not
accept anything outside of their realm.
http://www.whale.to/cancer/burzynski.html
DR BURZYNSKI, M.D.
"What made Dr Burzynski a threat to the cancer industry from the beginning was
the prospect that antineoplaston therapy represented a successful alternative
to toxic and dangerous chemotherapy drugs, upon which most of the cancer
industry’s profits depend. Did the NCI pick up the tab for completing his
research? Did the ACS help with favourable publicity? Of course not. The minute
NCI saw evidence of antineoplastons working they distorted the data by
withdrawing the 2 successful patients and thus the evidence. NCI’s conduct
towards him is a striking example of how an agency presumed to be objective can
set up a study that will either prove or disprove anything it wants. In this
case, there is clear evidence that NCI wanted to prove antineoplastons didn’t
work."—John Diamond, M.D. & Lee Cowden, M.D.
"Without exception, all the oncologists I talked to about Dr Burzynski were
scornful and hostile. Twenty- five years of practicing unconventional medicine
did not prepare me for what I discovered. Delving into attitudes, actions, and
beliefs of modern oncologists was like opening a box of cereal and finding it
full of worms. They just don’t care….The question I kept asking was why,
and the answer to that question gradually began to creep out: Dr Burzynski’s
discovery threatens one of the largest and most lucrative industries in the
history of mankind, the cancer treatment industry.
All those radiation machines and doctors who run them
All those chemotherapy drugs and the doctors who prescribe them
All those so called studies that just juggle the doses of chemo & radiation,
and
All those surgeons who have been flailing at cancer for over a 100 years
If it (antineoplastons) is allowed to flourish, it renders obsolete the entire
cancer treatment industry. He has discovered a non-toxic treatment that is
about as close to cure as we have ever seen. If you think the lumber jacks in
the Pacific Northwest were scornful of the spotted owl, you haven’t seen
anything yet….
Also it is not just about money, it is about strongly held beliefs, beliefs
that have meshed with the personality of virtually everyone in the cancer
treatment industry, especially the physicians. In short, these beliefs are that
cancer can only be treated with therapies that mutilate, poison, or burn the
patient, in the hope that they "kill" the cancer…..Therefore, each patient
who is miraculously cured by Burzynski’s nontoxic therapy is not viewed as a
breakthrough, or even as something good, but rather as a dangerous messenger of
heresy, a terrible threat to their beliefs."—Dr Whitaker, M.D.
"Typical of Burzynski's extraordinary results were the outcomes for early
groups of advanced cancer patients treated with antineoplastons: 60 percent
enjoyed objective remission, 47 percent experienced complete remission, and 20
percent survived for over five years without cancer. These and other results
are far superior to anything reported then or now for standard cancer
treatments. (For example, in 1985 interleukin-2 was heavily promoted by
orthodoxy, supposedly as a highly promising new treatment after a single study
showed it to have been associated with a complete remission from cancer in only
one patient out of twenty-four treated -- a positive response rate of only
fourpercent!)."--Barry Chowka http://members.aol.com/pbchowka/cancer94.html
Fly to Texas.
Dr Burzynski Research Institute Home page http://catalog.com/bri/bri.htm
http:[email hidden]/
Burzynski Patient Group Directory
http://www.burzynskipatientgroup.org/stories.htm
Ralph Moss on Burzynski saga http://www.ralphmoss.com/burz.html
Testimony of Raphaele Moreau-Horwin & Michael Horwin
Choices in Healing by Michael Lerner
http://www.commonwealhealth.org/choicescontents.html
Happy Brain Cancer Statistics
Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski took the FDA to court for slander.
The FDA was telling oncologists that he and his cancer
medicine were frauds, but Dr. Burzynski won the case
and the FDA was issued a cease and desist order.
To prove his case, Dr. Burzynski asked a respected
oncologist specializing in brain cancer, Dr. Robert
Burdick, to review his patient records and act as an
expert witness. The full text of the statement is
reproduced on the Burzynski Research Institute's site:
http://www.cancermed.com
If the text of the statement was not true, Dr. Burzynski
would loose his medical license and clinic.
In the statement, Dr. Robert Burdick stated that primary
brain cancer goes into remission 1 in 500+ times,
regardless of treatment, but that he documented
17 cases of remission in 40 total cases of primary
brain cancer enrolled in one of Dr. Burzynski's
phase I trials. He stated with authority that
the antineoplaston medicine must be responsible.
Dr. Burzynski beat the primary brain cancer odds by
more than 21250% Let the skeptics argue with that!
The FDA hauled Dr. Burzyski before 4 grand juries,
none of which found him guilty of anything. When
they announced a fifth grand jury trial, angry voices
were raised in congress and the FDA quickly dropped
its charges.
The FDA tried its best to jail Dr. Burzynski without any
proof of wrong doing, and if they had succeeded the medicine
that he and his large staff of doctors are testing would have
been effectively suppressed. As it is, justice prevailed and
72 phase II trials are currently in progress.
The amazing results of his medicin are not limited to
primary brain cancer. They include all the major cancers,
and are far better for the major cancers. The medicine
is non-toxic.
Too bad the oncologists and skeptics here will get mad
at me for pointing this out. Too bad that, like the FDA,
they don't want you to know about it.
Jan
