Dr. Burzynski is perhaps best-known forisn't this available somewhere else?
his discovery and development of antineoplastons,
which are peptides and amino acid derivates
that activate tumor suppressing-genes.
Antineoplastons have also been proven to be
an effective cancer treatment
via independent research by Japan's Dr. Hidaeki Tsuda
of the Kurume University Hospital.
Until the 1990s,
Dr. Burzynski used antineoplastons,
sometimes in conjunction with traditional oncology agents,
to treat and cure cancer patients.
Over the past several decades,
the conventional medical establishment,
via a succession of relentless attacks,
has slowly choked off patient access to antineoplastons.
After 1998, and at the insistence of the FDA,
treatment with antineoplastons was limited to
patients in registered FDA trials.
usa is such a he'll-hole of patents and obstruction .
. petition the FDA .
. japanese study on effects of Antineoplastons .
about Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D.:
. physician and biochemist-researcherUSA Today is tool of BigPharma?:
who pioneered the development and use of
biologically active peptides
in diagnosing, preventing and treating cancer, since 1967
--[ of 401 brain tumor cases with a
life expectancy of less than one year,
77 of them survived over five years ].
Dr. Burzynski is the author and co-author of over
300 scientific publications and presentations.
. as of January 2011,
he holds 242 patents registered in 35 countries,
related to 17 proprietary scientific inventions .
Dr. Burzynski has collaborated with researchers at
the National Cancer Institute,
the Medical College of Georgia,
the Imperial College of Science and Technology of London,
the University of Kurume Medical School in Japan,
the University of Turin Medical School in Italy, and others.
November 18, USA Today published two articles about
physician and biochemist Stanislaw Burzynski, MD, PhD:
"Doctor Accused of Selling False Hope to Families"
and "Experts Dismiss Doctor's Cancer Claims."
Dr. Burzynski would like a chance to refute
the allegations made about him, his work, and his clinic.
Dr. Burzynski submitted to you a 450-word rebuttal
that cited hard data about his treatments.
You sent back an edited version that was stripped of
any specific facts and statistics.
Dr. Burzynski then submitted a much shorter letter
that still included hard facts,
but you again refused to publish, this time claiming
that you "fact-check" all your letters to the editor,
and "couldn't verify" his statistics.
This is particularly ironic, since it seems obvious
that you didn't fact check the two articles in question,
omitting salient data like the fact that
of 401 brain tumor patients
with a life expectancy of less than one year,
seventy-seven of them survived over five years.
This is an astounding record for any cancer treatment.
In your "Doctor Accused" article, you cite
the lack of published random-controlled trials (RCTs)
as evidence of antineoplastons' uselessness,
while omitting the fact that
the efficacy of the treatment has recently been
confirmed by a randomized, clinical trial
by Japanese researchers.
The article claims there is no evidence that
Dr. Burzynski has cured "a single patient,"
despite the fact that
none of the article's quoted experts
have reviewed even one of the
several hundreds of clinical trial patients
who had documented responses to the treatment
or the seventy-seven patients in the brain tumor trials
who are long-term survivors.
In an effort to discredit Dr. Burzynski's statement
that proper approval of treatments takes time,
your article touts the number of cancer drugs
approved by the FDA (108) since Burzynski began his trials.
However, the speed at which drugs are approved
is no indication of quality:
a recent study found that in the past thirty years,
90% of all new drugs approved by the FDA
were barely more effective than existing drugs, if at all.
Many of these new cancer drugs show only
a very small survival benefit,
while Dr. Burzynski's antineoplaston therapy
has dozens and dozens of long-term survivors
from some of the most virulent forms of brain cancer.
If USA Today values journalistic integrity,
you absolutely owe it to your readers
to allow Dr. Burzynski to present his side of the story,
citing the documented facts demonstrating
his treatment's success.
Let him tell the whole story.
Surely you don't want USA Today to be accused of
concealing the truth from consumers
about how dangerous many cancer drugs are
and how newer (albeit less mainstream) treatments
are demonstrating powerful results, do you?