The Great Cancer Hoax: The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down… Burzynski Documentary Movie Review

The Great Cancer Hoax: The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down…

June 11, 2011  – VIEW THIS ENTRY ON MERCOLA.COM 
Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business from BurzynskiMovie on Vimeo.”Important! The producers of this powerful film are allowing a full and FREE viewing! Please tell everyone you know to watch this film in its entirety.”

By Dr.Mercola

Burzynski, the Movie is the story of a medical doctor and Ph.D biochemist named Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski who won the largest, and possibly the most convoluted and intriguing legal battle against the Food and Drug Administration in American history.

In the 1970’s, Dr. Burzynski made a remarkable discovery that threatened to change the face of cancer treatment forever. His non-toxic gene-targeted cancer medicine could have helped save millions of lives over the last two decades had his discovery not been criminally suppressed by the US government, as his therapy, called “antineoplastons,” have been shown to effectively help cure some of the most “incurable” forms of terminal cancer.

This documentary takes you through the treacherous 14-year journey Dr. Burzynski and his patients have had to endure in order to finally obtain FDA-approved clinical trials of antineoplastons.

His story is yet another testament that fact can be far stranger than fiction, as the film exposes the powerful, unscrupulous forces that work to maintain the status quo of the medical- and pharmaceutical industry at any cost-including the lives of millions of people.

Dr. Burzynski’s Story is a Jaw-Dropper

Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski was born in the early 1940’s in Poland, and was trained as both a biochemist and a physician. He’s spent the last 35 years developing and successfully treating cancer patients suffering with some of the most lethal forms of cancer at his clinic in Houston, Texas.

I recently interviewed Dr. Burzynski about his cancer treatment-a gene-targeted approach using non-toxic peptides and amino acids, known as antineoplastons. Here, I will follow up with a review of his recently released documentary,Burzynski, The Movie.

It’s an absolute jaw-dropper…

For anyone who has ever been affected by cancer, either directly or indirectly, the facts presented in this film will hit you like a rude slap in the face.

You will learn that not only did the US Federal government spend 14 years actively suppressing a cancer treatment that had a FAR greater success rate than any other treatment available, they also spent well over $60 million of US taxpayer dollars trying to put the inventor of the treatment in jail in order to steal his patents and either suppress or cash in on his discovery.

This film is an absolute MUST-SEE, as the summary I’m about to present below simply cannot do it justice. It’s available for purchase at BurzynkiMovie.com, where you can view the first half-hour for free. The site also contains a large number of video clips, as well as a full transcript of the entire film, along with links to all the documentation presented.

What’s so Special about Dr. Burzynski’s Treatment?

The story begins back in the early 1970’s when Dr. Burzynski discovered that people with cancer lacked a certain peptide, while those who were cancer free had a plentiful supply of it.

This finding eventually led him to create a medical treatment referred to as antineoplastons. The drug contains a mixture of peptides and derivatives of amino acids. These were known to act as molecular switches, but as genome research blossomed and science progressed, Dr. Burzynski discovered they also work as genetic switches, and that is why antineoplastons work so well. They’re actually able to turn on cancer suppressing genes, while simultaneously turning oncogenes (cancer genes) off.

As explained in the film:

“Our bodies contain two categories of genes that allow cancer to flourish: oncogenes, and tumor suppressor genes. When someone has cancer, they have a higher level of oncogenes switched on, with a higher-level tumor suppressor genes switched off.

The goal is to tell the body to both switch back on the tumor suppressor genes, and turn off as many oncogenes as possible.”

While other gene targeting cancer drugs now exist, they’re only capable of targeting a small number of specific cancer genes. Antineoplastons, on the other hand, targets a wide spectrum of cancer genes-about 100 of them at once. In a very simplistic way, antineoplastons are to cancer what a broad-spectrum antibiotic is to infectious disease.

Success Rates of Chemo and Radiation versus Antineoplastons

The film features several remarkable case stories of people who were successfully cured of cancer, but it’s when the clinical trial data of conventional therapies versus antineoplastons are stacked against each other that the benefits of antineoplastons become really obvious:

Radiation or Chemotherapy Only Antineoplastons Only
5 of 54 patients (9 percent) 5 of 20 (25 percent)
were cancer free at the end of treatment were cancer free at the end of treatment
Toxic side effects No toxic side effects

Tackling Childhood Brain Tumors

Dr. Burzynski was so confident in his antineoplastons that he even accepted the most difficult and “hopeless” cases, such as childhood brain tumors. Conventional medicine has little or nothing to offer in these cases, and the side effects can be as horrific as the disease itself, if not more. Furthermore, the best outcome conventional treatment can offer is to slow down the growth of the tumor.

Using antineoplastons, however, Dr. Burzynski has been able to successfully cure many of these otherwise hopeless cases, such as Jessica Ressel.

She was 11 years old when she was diagnosed with brainstem glioma-an incurable brain tumor. After learning that she would die no matter what toxic drugs and radiation treatments she underwent, the family decided to not put her through it. When they found Dr. Burzynski, they literally had nothing to lose…

Twelve months later-after having initially been told she had but a few months to live, and given no chance of survival at all-MRI’s confirmed she was cancer-free. Her brain tumor was completely resolved. Today, Jessica is a healthy 24-year old woman, pregnant with her second child.

When comparing FDA-supervised studies of treatments for lethal childhood brainstem gliomas, antineoplastons again comes out as a clear winner:

Chemotherapy Only Antineoplastons Only
1 of 107 patients (0.9 percent) 11 of 40 patients (27.5 percent)
were cancer free at the end of treatment were cancer free at the end of treatment
0 of 107 patients (0 percent) 11 of 40 patients (27.5 percent)
survived past five years survived past five years

Even more interesting, while some of Dr. Burzynski’s patients did eventually die after the five-year mark, most who did NOT undergo chemotherapy prior to getting antineoplastons have gone on to live normal, healthy lives-yet another indication that in many cases, the conventional treatments are more lethal than the disease itself

Side Effects of Chemotherapy Drugs

Here’s just a sampling of the side effects of three conventional chemotherapy drugs:

  • Doxorubicin (nick-name: Red Death)-leukemia, heart failure, infertility, mouth sores
  • Etoposide-leukemia, nerve damage, inability to fight infections
  • Cisplatin-kidney damage, hearing damage, nerve damage, infertility

Another chemo drug, Mitotane, which is derived from DDT, is also used for pediatric patients even though no studies have ever been performed to ascertain its safety or effectiveness in children.

Dr. Burzynski’s Troubles Begins…

The legal battle Dr. Burzynski found himself embroiled in over his invention is convoluted to say the least. There are many bizarre twists and turns, and I strongly urge you to watch the documentary to fully appreciate what happened.

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 reviewed federal and Texas state laws, confirming that he was acting within the laws and could use antineoplastons in his own practice “to meet the immediate needs of patients,” since he was a licensed physician. Particularly if no other alternatives were available to the patient. He could not engage in interstate commerce, however, so he had to restrict the use of the drug to his home state of Texas.

But word spread, and patients started traveling to his office from out of state.

Suddenly, in 1984, he found out that agents from the Texas board of medical examiners were traveling to patients across the country trying to convince them to file charges against him.

What followed next truly challenges the rational mind.

Texas Board of Medical Examiners Try to Strip Away his Medical License

In 1988, despite not breaking any laws, and having produced more evidence than was required to show that his treatment was effective and that no harm was coming to his patients from it, the Texas medical board charged him with breaking a law that didn’t exist, claiming it was grounds for revoking his medical license.

They didn’t have a case, but kept the charges going by continuing to file slightly amended complaints, until finally, in 1993, the case went to trial. By then, 60 of Dr. Burzynski’s patients had filed a petition for the medical board to stop harassing their doctor-a petition that the board successfully eliminated from the trial by filing a motion to strike it from the record.

Testifying on Dr. Burzynski’s behalf, however, was a leading expert from none other than the National Cancer Institute (NCI), Dr. Nicholas Patronas, MD, a board certified radiologist since 1973, and the founder and chief of Neurology at the NCI. Even he recognized the absurdity of the board’s case, and put his own career on the line to testify.

The judge ruled in Dr. Burzynski’s favor, confirming that no laws had been broken.

You’d think that would be the end of it. But not so in this case.  Instead of accepting defeat, the Texas medical board filed charges against Dr. Burzynski with the Texas Supreme Court.

The Method Behind the FDA’s Madness

It eventually came to light that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had pressured the Texas medical board to revoke Dr. Burzynski’s medical license-despite the fact that no laws were broken, and his treatment was proven safe and effective.

But WHY?

It’s been stated many times that a crime can be solved simply by following the money, and this case is no exception. The FDA and the pharmaceutical industry had realized that if Dr. Burzynski’s discovery-which he owned the patent for-received a fair review, chemotherapy and radiation would rapidly dwindle into obscurity, effectively crippling the industry. Not only that, but if antineoplastons were approved, billions of dollars of cancer research funds would get funneled over to one single scientist who had exclusive patent rights…

Dr. Richard Crout, Director of the FDA Bureau of Drugs, once wrote in a 1982 newsletter:

“I never have and never will approve a new drug to an individual, but only to a large pharmaceutical firm with unlimited finances.”

It became clear that ever since 1977, when Dr. Burzynski first tried to get antineoplastons approved, the FDA had begun scheming to eliminate the threat he and his discovery posed to the entire cancer industry…

The Harassment Continues Unabated

The FDA, under the direction of Commissioner Dr. David Kessler, called no fewer than FOUR different grand jury investigations into Dr. Burzynski’s practice, despite the fact that none of the grand juries ever found him to be at fault, and no indictment ever came from any of the investigations.

But the FDA did not let up.

Finally, in 1995, just days after the final grand jury investigation, which also had found no fault, Dr. Burzynski was inexplicably indicted on charges of fraud, and 75 counts of violating federal law. If found guilty, he now faced 290 years in federal prison, and $18.5 million in fines.

A year later, in a bizarre twist brought about by congressional and public pressure, the FDA agreed to accept all of Dr. Burzynski’s patients into a series of 72 FDA-supervised phase 2 clinical trials.

1996 article in The Washington Post noted:

“The prosecution marks the first time the FDA has tried to jail a scientist for using a drug on which he is conducting FDA authorized clinical trials.”

Federal Government Spent $60 Million Trying to Bury Dr. Burzynski

This second trial cost American taxpayers a whopping $60 million just in legal fees alone-that’s not counting the cost of continually harassing him (including several raids on his office) and his patients over the preceding 11 years. Dr. Burzynski spent $2.2 million on his own defense, $700,000 of which was raised by Dr. Julian Whitaker through requests for donations in his newsletter Health & Healing.

On March 4, 1997, the judge declared it a mistrial, due to a deadlocked jury. However, after stating the government had not presented sufficient evidence in its case, he ordered that Dr. Burzynski be acquitted of 42 of the 75 counts.

But the FDA wasn’t done yet. They took him to court AGAIN!

Third Time’s the Charm…

At this point, many were becoming increasingly aware that something very bizarre and unusual was going on. Jurors from the first trial even joined patients in protests outside the courthouse. One clear-headed juror from the previous trial stated:

“Please don’t waste my money abusing the system to make sure that you maintain your power!”

On May 28, 1997, after three hours of deliberation, the jury came back with their final verdict: Not Guilty. By now you’re probably thinking that this victory surely must mark the end of the wrongful harassment of Dr. Burzynski.

But no. It gets worse.

Secret Dealings Hide True Intents

While this ongoing drama unfolded over the course of more than a decade, something even more sinister was taking place behind the scenes, unbeknownst to Dr. Burzynski and his legal counsel.

In 1989, Dr. Burzynski had retained Dr. Dvorit Samid as a research consultant, and she did a lot of work with the antineoplaston ingredients. At the time, Dr. Samid worked at the Uniformed Services Medical School in Baltimore. She later transferred to the National Cancer Institute.

By 1990-while the Texas medical board kept filing one amended complaint after the other against Dr. Burzynski, in an effort to revoke his license-he had decided that the easiest way to keep the government from putting him out of business or in prison, was to partner with a pharmaceutical company. As luck would have it, he’d treated the sister-in-law of the Chairman and CEO of Élan Pharmaceuticals, and Élan eagerly drafted a letter of intent stating they would aggressively pursue the filing of the necessary protocols with the FDA for approval and marketing of antineoplastons.

Dr. Samid began working closely with Élan on the project. But once the financing, licensing agreements and royalties had been negotiated and agreed upon, Élan suddenly changed its tune, stating they had significant doubt as to whether the active substances could be patented, which would render an agreement meaningless.

As it turns out, Élan had instead partnered with the National Cancer Institute (NCI), where Dr. Samid got the position of section chief. They then co-sponsored laboratory research and clinical trials on just one of the antineoplastons’ ingredients-an ingredient that Dr. Burzynski had NOT been able to patent due to the fact that it was already known. However, he had also already determined it to be very limited in terms of effectiveness on its own, over a decade ago.

Élan and the NCI spent tens of millions of dollars testing this single ingredient… Not surprisingly, it failed. Dr. Burzynski had already established that the ingredients must be used in combination in order to be effective. After realizing they could not duplicate the effectiveness of Dr. Burzynski’s antineoplastons, the NCI finally agreed to conduct his clinical trials under the direction of Dr. Michael Friedman.

Sabotaging Trials-Par the Course for the National Cancer Institute

How do you sabotage a clinical trial?

It’s actually easier than you might think. You’ll have to watch the film to get all the details, but in summary, the trials were closed prior to completion, and were written off with the statement “no conclusion can be made about the effectiveness or toxicity of antineoplastons.” But it was clear, based on the study data, that seven of the nine patients enrolled received NO antineoplastons whatsoever! The others received dosages that were far lower than recommended.

Adding insult to injury, in 1999, about a year after Dr. Burzynski had been acquitted a third and final time, the NCI published these invalid trials in the medical literature, citing antineoplastons as a complete failure. So sure, Dr. Burzynski was a free man; cleared of all charges and free to practice medicine, but now the National Cancer Institute had effectively undermined the credibility and commercial viability of his medical discovery…

What the film reveals next truly boggles the mind.

After the National Cancer Institute intentionally violated all protocols of their own antineoplaston trials, and after all state and federal agencies had failed in their 14-year campaign to remove Burzynski from society-after all of the dust settled-a profound truth began to emerge.

Theft and Patent Infringement-All in a Day’s Work

In October 1991-while the Texas medical board kept filing amended complaints against him in an effort to revoke his license, due to pressure from the FDA-the National Cancer Institute (NCI) had conducted a site visit to Dr. Burzynski’s clinic, and verified that “anti-tumor activity was documented by the use of antineoplastons.”

As it turns out, a mere 17 days after this visit, the United States of America as represented by “The Department of Health and Human Services,” filed a patent for antineoplastons AS2-1… one of the two antineoplastons Dr. Burzynski had already patented.

The inventor listed?

“Dr. Dvorit Samid,” Dr. Burzynski’s former research consultant. The patent states:

“The invention described herein may be manufactured, used and licensed by or for the government, for governmental purposes, without the payment to us of any royalties thereon.”

Over the next four years, while the witch-hunt to put Dr. Burzynski behind bars was in full swing, the US Government filed 10 more patents antineoplastons.

By the summer of 1995, around the time that Burzynski was indicted for fraud and 75 counts of violating federal law, Dr. Michael Friedman-who sabotaged the NCI antineoplastons trials-had left the NCI and become Deputy Commissioner of Operations for the FDA, working directly under FDA Commissioner Dr. David Kessler-the man responsible for dragging Dr. Burzynski in front of no less than four different grand juries a few years earlier.

In November of 1995, a month into Dr. Burzynski’s trial, where he faced 290 years in prison, the US Patent office approved the first US Government patent for antineoplastons.  Between 1995 and 2000, the US Patent office approved all 11 copycat patents on antineoplastons AS2-1…

Who Pays for Their Crimes?

By now your head is probably spinning, so let’s recap.

Dr. Burzynski developed a cancer treatment that surpassed all other treatments on the market, and the FDA, the pharmaceutical industry, and the National Cancer Institute all knew it. They also knew he was the sole owner of the patents for this therapy, and these two facts combined, threatened the entire paradigm of the cancer industry.

The cancer paradigm is based on very expensive machines and toxic drugs. There’s an enormous amount of money to be made in this paradigm, and Dr. Burzynski single-handedly threatened to overturn it.

So they tried to copy his invention using a single non-patented ingredient. It failed. The next step was to steal the whole thing right from under him. There was just one problem. They knew they couldn’t use the stolen patents as long as Dr. Burzynski walked free and had the ability to defend his rights to them… So they concocted 75 fraudulent charges to tuck him away in jail for the rest of his life.

Fortunately for us, they failed in that too.

Dr. Whitaker sums it up nicely when he says:

“How can the US Patent office be corrupted to the point they issue patents for a medical treatment that’s already been patented and issue them to someone who had nothing to do with their discovery or use? And how can the Patent office then assign these fraudulent patents to some of the most powerful institutions in the American government? And, imagine, all of this was done while these same agencies were spending millions of taxpayer dollars trying to put Dr. Burzynski in jail, so he could not fight the criminal theft of his discovery!”

As I said in the beginning, the facts of this case challenge the mind of any sane and rational person, but make no mistake about it: These things did happen, and Dr. Burzynski has all the documentation to back it up.

The US Government did harass and intimidate, and they did try to falsely imprison a brilliant scientist, simply because he’d discovered an effective cancer therapy, while simultaneously engaging in patent infringement.

Now, while this was an enormous personal hardship for Dr. Burzynski, the US Government also, through their enormous greed, in a very direct way prevented millions of cancer patients to receive a non-toxic therapy that could have saved their life. Remember, Dr. Burzynski has been trying to get antineoplastons reviewed and approved since 1977, to no avail. It’s absolutely heartbreaking to consider the cost of this criminal behavior in terms of human life, including young children.

The Deadly, But Highly Profitable, Cancer Paradigm

While the stolen patents are filled with useful information about the benefits and efficacy of antineoplastons, one statement in particular sums up the problem with the current cancer paradigm:

“Current approaches to combat cancer rely primarily on the use of chemicals and radiation, which are themselves carcinogenic and may promote recurrences and the development of metastatic disease.”

Dr. Burzynski’s therapy, as you may recall, is non-toxic, giving patients the option to at least not suffer more grievous harm from the treatment itself, in addition to a significantly greater chance of being cured.

I’m sure that whenever someone donates their hard-earned money or participates in a pink-ribbon walkathon, they believe they’re doing a good thing. They believe they’re helping fund vital cancer research that will hopefully, some day, find a cure for cancer. Little do they know that much of this money goes toward perpetuating the status quo of cancer treatment, namely highly toxic drugs and expensive machines-the same old paradigm centered around profit.

As of 2010, the National Cancer Institute’s annual budget is $5.2 billion. Dr. Burzynski cannot get a single dime of it. All of his research into antineoplastons over the past 35 years has been self-funded.

Think about that for a moment. Not one dime has been funneled toward developing one of the most promising cancer therapies to emerge in the past three decades… Are you still convinced they have your best interest at heart, and are diligently working to “find a cure for cancer”?

If you’re NOT convinced, I’d urge you to take a look at the story of alternative cancer physician Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez, which has similarities to that of Dr. Burzynski. Gonzalez’ treatments are so successful that conventional physicians felt the need to shut him down.

June 11, 2011  – VIEW THIS ENTRY ON MERCOLA.COM 


PBS CPT12 Presents Burzynski The Movie – Cancer Is Serious Business – Hosted by Eric Merola (Public Broadcasting)

Profiles Dr. Burzynski and his battle with the FDA over his controversial cancer therapy.

Click here to watch the entire segment hosted by Eric Merola as it aired on PBS: http://video.cpt12.org/video/2341438312

pds_74310349_burzynski-movie-cancer-logo

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
This film tells the story of Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski, a pioneering medical doctor and PhD biochemist who won the largest – and possibly the most convoluted – legal battle against the Food and Drug Administration in American history. Burzynski’s battles were centered on his belief in Antineoplastons, a gene-targeting cancer therapy he discovered in the 1970s.

The ultimate approval of Antineoplastons would mark the first time in history a single scientist, not a pharmaceutical company, would hold the exclusive patent and distribution rights on a paradigm-shifting, life-saving medical breakthrough.

Directed by Eric Merola, BURZYNKSI provides first-person testimonials of cancer patients who chose his treatment instead of surgery, chemotherapy or radiation – with full disclosure of original medical records to support their diagnosis and recovery.
IN-STUDIO GUESTS:
During its CPT12 premiere, Director Eric Merola and Houston’s Burzynski Clinic spokesperson Azad Rastegar will join CPT12 Director of Development Shari Bernson and journalist Rebecca Stevens live in the studio to discuss the film.

 

Review – BBC Panorama June 3, 2013 Burzynski Special tells only .03% of the Story – Quick Review

The BBC Panorama aired a TV special called “CURING CANCER OR SELLING FLASE HOPE TO THE VULNERABLE?”

Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22717245

BBC 5 RADIO SHOW the morning before the TV airing – with different perspectives from the same people interviewed by the BBC –  than what the BBC portrayed in their TV special: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b021480r

I will be updating this blog entry in the near future, but I wanted to write about what I thought after watching this TV programme in the UK tonight.

First of all they excluded all United Kingdom (UK) patients who were cured using Antineoplastons, namely Laura Hymas who is cancer-free after 7 months of Antineoplastons therapy for her Glioblastoma Multiforme Grade IV brain cancer—since she started in late 2011. The BBC included Rofus Hound’s Twitter video in support of helping Laura Hymas (which is also featured in Burzynski: Part II) but avoided mentioning the fact that Rufus Hound’s twitter video single-handedly raised the required 75 thousand pounds she needed for one-year’s treatment. Without Rufus Hound, Laura might not have been able to afford Antineoplaston therapy—Rufus indirectly saved Laura’s life, but the BBC didn’t find that to fit their agenda. (Below).

99deb-3_benlaura_jacob

The BBC did choose to include Hannah Bradley, but they never informed their audience that she too is in a compete remission due to Antineoplaston therapy when she started therapy in late 2011. You can watch a full length documentary dedicated exclusively to Hannah’s journey produced by her partner Pete Cohen here, called “Hannah’s Anecdote”.  (Hannah is pictured below with her partner Pete Cohen).

2_PeteHannah_2013

In additional to touting out Rufus Hound in the BBC “special”, they also mentioned that UK comedian Peter Kaye  also helped one of the patients raise money for the therapy. However, they failed to mention that this patient was Billie Bainbridge. The BBC showed graphic after graphic of Billie’s fundraising effort “The Billie Butterfly Fund” but decided not to include her mother, Terri Bainbridge in the BBC special—because although Billie died, Terri does not regret her decision of taking her daughter to Burzynski—since Billie had an incurable Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma—something never before cured in world medical history. Antineoplastons are on record of curing 33 of 169 patients of this tumor type, while the remainder of the world’s medical community has never cured it once. If the BBC included Terri and her decision to take her daughter there (with the help of Peter Kaye) and reminded the UK audience that this tumor type has never been cured outside of Antineoplaston therapy in medical history—it wouldn’t have fit the BBC’s agenda. (Terri Bainbridge is pictured below).

1_Terri

Perhaps one thing that was most striking was that the BBC tried to convince their audience that Dr. Burzynski had made a documentary film (Burzynski, the Movie) about himself. When in fact, not one—but two documentaries have been directed and produced by an American independent film maker and investigative journalist named Eric Merola. (Below).

merola_humandoc_2011-1

The first documentary entitled “Burzynski, the Movie” has won numerous international film festival and television awards since its release. “Burzynski, the Movie” quickly attracted widespread distribution along with many awards including Best Documentary 2011 on the Documentary Channel and 2 Audience Awards at the HumanDoc Festival in Warsaw 2011. It also received favorable reviews from The Los Angeles TimesThe New York Times and Variety.

In 2013, the highly anticipated sequel, “Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II”, released in nearly 200 million homes across the USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, Ireland, and New Zealand on June 1, 2013—was not mentioned in the BBC special. Perhaps this is because the producers at the BBC were well aware that the very same patients they interviewed for their BBC Panorama special were also interviewed by Merola for his new documentary—simultaneously. Anyone watching both Merola’s new release and the BBC Panorama Special on Burzynski will find that the very same people interviewed for Panorama had a glaringly different opinion of their experience than how they were portrayed by the BBC’s Panorama.

The way the BBC did this to deceive its audience was clever. They choose narration to speak “for” the interviewees, then followed up the narration with the interviewee thmselves, giving the audience the illusion that this is how the interviewee felt.

The BBC also led its audience to believe that no one has ever reproduced the studies of Burzynski. “Burzynski: Part II” showcases a gigantic 27-year long Japanese study where independent scientists at Kurume University studied Antineoplastons without Burzynski’s participation. The Japanese ended their independent study with the holy grail of clinical testing: the randomized controlled clinical trial—where the Antineoplaston group had double the survival rate of the control group. If the BBC included this in its special, it would have devastated their message that Antineoplastons have never been independently tested. (Dr. Tsuda, one of the members of this medical team is pictured below).

1_Tsuda

One of the most common things the BBC did, was consistently attempt to communicate the idea that none of the data from Burzynski’s clinical trials have been published. This is simply not true. This is the holy grail of manipulation within any organization making an attempt to discredit the work of Burzynski and the results of Antineoplastons. When, in reality, anyone can do a simple search on “Pub Med” for Burzynski or Antineoplastons and find many publications for review. For example one of the most telling internationally peer-reviewed publications related to diffuse intrinsic brainstem glioma can be found in Pediatric Drugs. Below is a sample chart comparing conventional therapy to Antineoplaston therapy for this tumor type:

chart

Click here to read the entire article, and notice on page 2 of the PDF where it states: “All manscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.”

In addition, America’s National Cancer Institute has also published and acknowledged the scientifically peer-reviewed publications on its website, Click here to see a table showing some of the results of Phase 2 clinical trials as published by America’s National Cancer Institute.

If the BBC showed this to its audience, it would have also contradicted its agenda.

This blog entry will be greatly updated soon—but in the meantime, if you genuinely care about this subject, and want to truly experience a genuine, objective, and transparent story of “Burzynski” and his invention “antineoplastons”, without a predetermined agenda, be sure to watch both “Part 1” (2010) and “Part 2” (2013) documentaries.

Burzynski, the Movie (Part 1) can be viewed on Netflix in the USA, purchased on DVD shipping worldwide, or even seen for free on YouTube.

Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II can be viewed on TV in the USA & Canada “On Demand”; and online via Amazon and iTunes in the USA; via iTunes in the rest of the English speaking world.

I found this Movie Film Review of Burzynski: Part II, which includes an interview with its director, Eric Merola, to be quite informative. 

Trailer Burzynski: Part II released 2013

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iglEF_y0cNg

For more information on the documentary series: www.burzynskimovie.com

Eric Merola with Dr. Mehmet Oz (interview with Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski and Eric Merola)

Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business interview and review.

About the documentary:

ABOUT BURZYNSKI: CANCER IS SERIOUS BUSINESS, PART I (2010/2011):

Burzynski, the Movie is an internationally award-winning documentary originally released in 2010 (with an Extended Edition released in 2011) that tells the true story of a medical doctor and Ph.D biochemist named Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski who won the largest, and possibly the most convoluted and intriguing legal battle against the Food & Drug Administration in American history.

His victorious battles with the United States government were centered around Dr. Burzynski’s gene-targeted cancer medicines he discovered in the 1970’s called Antineoplastons, which have currently completed Phase II FDA-supervised clinical trials in 2009 and has been given permission by the FDA to begin the final phase of FDA testing–randomized controlled clinical trials.

When Antineoplastons are approved, it will mark the first time in history a single scientist, not a pharmaceutical company, will hold the exclusive patent and distribution rights on a paradigm-shifting medical breakthrough.

Antineoplastons are responsible for curing some of the most incurable forms of terminal cancer. Various cancer survivors are presented in the film who chose these medicines instead of surgery, chemotherapy or radiation – with full disclosure of medical records to support their diagnosis and recovery – as well as systematic (non-anecdotal) FDA-supervised clinical trial data comparing Antineoplastons to other available treatments—which is published within the peer-reviewed medical literature.

One form of cancer – diffuse, intrinsic, childhood brainstem glioma has never before been cured in any scientifically controlled clinical trial in the history of medicine. Antineoplastons hold the first cures in history – dozens of them. [Pediatric Drugs – 2006[ANP – PubMed 2003] [ANP – PubMed 2006] [ANP – Cancer Therapy 2007] [Rad & other – PubMed 2008] [Chemo/Rad – PubMed 2005] 

This documentary takes the audience through the treacherous, yet victorious, 14-year journey both Dr. Burzynski and his patients have had to endure in order to obtain FDA-approved clinical trials of Antineoplastons.

Dr. Burzynski resides and practices medicine in Houston, Texas. He was able to initially produce and administer his discovery without FDA-approval from 1977-1995 because the state of Texas at this time did not require that Texas physicians be required to adhere to Federal law in this situation. This law has since been changed.

As with anything that changes current-day paradigms, Burzynski’s ability to successfully treat incurable cancer with such consistency has baffled the industry. Ironically, this fact had prompted numerous investigations by the Texas Medical Board, who relentlessly took Dr. Burzynski as high as the state supreme court in their failed attempt to halt his practices.

Likewise, the Food and Drug Administration engaged in four Federal Grand Juries spanning over a decade attempting to indict Dr. Burzynski, all of which ended in no finding of fault on his behalf. Finally, Dr. Burzynski was indicted in their 5th Grand Jury in 1995, resulting in two federal trials and two sets of jurors finding him not guilty of any wrongdoing. If convicted, Dr. Burzynski would have faced a maximum of 290 years in a federal prison and $18.5 million in fines.

However, what was revealed a few years after Dr. Burzynski won his freedom, helps to paint a more coherent picture regarding the true motivation of the United States government’s relentless persecution of Stanislaw Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D.

Note: When Antineoplastons are approved for public use, it will allow a single scientist to hold an exclusive right to manufacture and sell these medicines on the open market—potentially leaving the pharmaceutical industry absent in profiting from the most effective gene-targeted cancer treatment the world has ever seen. 

Buy the new 2-DVD set | Buy the original DVD | Watch instantly on iTunes or Vudu or Amazon

Watch the trailers for Burzynski: Part 1:

Variety Magazine Reviews BURZYNSKI, the MOVIE (Cancer is Serious Business, Part 1 – 2010) – directed by Eric Merola

VARIETY MOVIE REVIEW:

Original Post: http://variety.com/2010/film/reviews/burzynski-1117942914/

Review: “Burzynski”

By 

Eric Merola’s documentary concerns Stanislaw Burzynski, the controversial doctor who purportedly developed a significant breakthrough in the treatment of cancer. “Burzynski” sometimes plays more like a dossier of depositions than a film, with its parade of medical records, X-rays, cured patients, talking-head experts and Senate hearing coverage. Instead of crafting a nice-if-it’s-true advocacy piece for alternative medicine, such as “A Beautiful Thing,” Merola has opted for a dramatic expose of the FDA and its incestuous relationship with Big Pharma as it seeks to first discredit, then co-opt Burzynski’s discovery. Docu bows June 4 in New York and Los Angeles.

Merola opens with a police sergeant’s emotional eyewitness account at a Congressional subcommittee hearing. The policeman relates how his 6-year-old daughter was completely cured of an inoperable cancer by Burzynski’s revolutionary nontoxic method, only to eventually die from her earlier exposure to FDA- and AMA-approved levels of radiation.

Merola thus quickly establishes his film’s three main thrusts: the unfair, inequitable array of government and agency forces vs. individuals’ testimonials in the persecution of Burzynski; the efficacy and nontoxicity of Burzynski’s patented discovery in treating aggressive brain tumors; and the terrible, often lethal side effects of treatments by traditional means.

When Burzynski uncovered a hitherto unknown substance in the human body (antineoplastons), he was quick to recognize its importance as a genetic mechanism to reverse several severe types of cancer. The FDA’s stated disinclination to facilitate research by an individual, as opposed to a large company, limited Burzynski to receiving patients in his home state of Texas. Yet despite strict adherence to the law, he was repeatedly hauled before the State Medical Board, which sought, unsuccessfully, to indict him, whereupon the FDA stepped into the fray, convening five separate federal grand juries over the course of a decade, none of which proved any wrongdoing. Indeed, the persecution of Burzynski was so relentless and futile that Congress called for hearings into what was perceived as harassment.

The unfolding scenario displays all the tawdry, nightmarish qualities of a paranoid conspiracy theory. The paucity of doctors willing to defy the FDA (pictures of physicians alongside their recorded statements often substituting for direct interviews) and the film’s general zero-budget look — resulting from the picture’s one-man crew (explanatory diagrams are often simplistic to the point of idiocy) — nearly send “Burzynski” into National Enquirer territory. Interviewees are at pains to look calm, perhaps explained by one doctor’s reference to the fate of the 19th-century physician who opined that washing one’s hands after an autopsy could prevent puerperal fever (he was drummed out of the profession and died in an insane asylum).

Nevertheless, the public nature of Burzynski’s predicament, the avowed sympathy of the media (represented in clips from a variety of sources) and several documented cures in “hopeless” cases grant a degree of legitimacy to the good doctor’s ongoing struggles. Despite its infotainment look, “Burzynski” ultimately proves convincing.

Burzynski

Production

A Merola Prods. production. Produced, directed, written, edited by Eric Merola.

Crew

Camera (color, DV), Merola. Reviewed on DVD, New York, May 23, 2010. Running time: 106 MIN.

With

Stanislaw Burzynski, Julian Whitaker, Richard Jaffe, Joe Barton, David Kessler, Michael Friedman, Jodi Fenton, Jessocal Ressel-Doeden, Steve Hill, Sarah Hill, Kelsey Hill.

BURZYNSKI SKEPTIC – Intro to the Sociopathic Ranting of Bigotry and Hate by the anti-Burzynski Astroturf / “Skeptics” (aka “Thought Police/Status Quo Chauvinists”)

UPDATED MARCH 9, 2014:

orac_gorski_burzynski_douchebag

Internet Trolls Really Are Horrible People

Narcissistic, Machiavellian, psychopathic, and sadistic.

What is an Astroturf Campaign?

Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message (e.g. political, advertising, or public relations) to give the appearance of it coming from a disinterested, grassroots participant. Astroturfing is intended to give the statements the credibility of an independent entity by withholding information about the source’s financial connection. The term astroturfingis a derivation of AstroTurf, a brand of synthetic carpeting designed to look like natural grass.

The Skeptics are the Sheriff’s Department of the “Thought Police”. Not be to be confused with the genuine Skeptics like Carl Sagan or Neil deGrasse Tyson — these people exposed in this blog are those who hide behind the Skeptic Movement as a medium for their paid propaganda. Not all of them, but those at the top are paid, while feeding their blithering nonsense to their “followers”, very cult-like. The followers just blindly believe in whatever they say, without researching anything. Not exactly the behavior of a Skeptic huh? Pretty embarrassing for them, but hey, people are pretty stupid and will believe anything their trusted peers say without verifying any of it! The Skeptics in this blog care not about Science, that care not about Research, they care only about destroying any scientific innovation that threatens the current status quo. They are there to protect the “establishment” and like its name, it is “established” and it not open to change.

The very idea that they identify themselves as “Skeptics” is one of the most hilarious, yet sad, oxymorons set forth in our society.

dianthus_medical_denial

UK’s Dianthus Medical (Adam Jacobs) PAID Pharma consultant shill & professional Astroturfer against any new competing science and technology, primarily on twitter — pretends he does it without getting paid! Visit his consulting website here: http://dianthus.co.uk/

Using terms like “rape” to relate to a life-saving scientist isn’t uncommon either:

scumbag

Bob Blaskiewicz, the creator of the bizzarely perverted death list known as the “other Burzynski patient group” & the internet’s leading astroturfing sociopath and troll apparently got a raise and created a FAKE twitter account in Dr. Burzynski’s name (Bob quickly yanked it down out of fear of being sued into homelessness and losing his other “cover job” allegedly “teaching english” to children):

twitter_criminals

He also makes rude videos too, here is a screenshot:

video_screen

doctor_paul_morgan

 

dianthus_bigot

Guy Chapman, another professional Astroturfer against anything of scientific innovation that competes with the status quo, pretends to not know how to spell “astroturfing“.

guy_chapman

This tweet above is quite comical. “Guy Chapman” is the “Editor in Chief” and lead Gate Keeper to the “Burzynski Clinic” Wikipedia page. He is a dangerous and well-paid sociopath, much like Orac/Gorski and Bob Blaskiewicz. If you are wondering why the Wikipedia Page on “Burzynski” reads like a North Korea Tourist brochure, ask Guy Chapman. 

bigot_tweet

Notice PHIL HARRIS’ tweet. Racism is also common with the personalities the industry hires to carry out this dirty work. Sort of like hiring a professional hit man, these are not nice people. Imagine how deranged a human being must be to sit around all day getting paid to insult cancer patients on twitter and anyone practicing the concept of “thinking for yourself”. It’s right out of the policies of Mein Kampt.

download

Screen shot 2012-11-13 at 10.37.00 PM

1_hack

2_Hack

3_Hack

Bob Blaskiewicz bragging just before he and his paid wanna-be Nazi cronies apparently hacked the Burzynski Clinic webpage. 

 

Screen shot 2012-11-23 at 9.59.29 PM

Screen shot 2013-12-25 at 12.38.45 AM

Robert “Bob” Blaskiewicz is an unbridled sociopath who sadly teaches English to children (if their parents only knew)  – which is hilarious that he claims to teach “science” (lying pathologically is a part of the package of a sociopath like Bob)-  he spends all day, every day, 7 days a week, nearly 24 hours a day following internet alerts to fight anyone online who finds out about Dr. Burzynski, a Burzynski patient, or anyone that dares talk about stepping outside of the status quo in regards to trying to save their own life (think Holocaust prisoner seeing an open door to the bunker, and Robert “Bob” Blaskiewicz is the guy that is secretly working for Hitler that says “oh no, you need to stay here, you will be fine if you stay here.” If you encounter this lunatic online, steer clear, unless you are ready to enter a realm of nonsensical, illogical, crazy neo-nazi style fireworks of fear, hate and unbridled bigotry.

Robert “Bob” Blaskiewicz is also the lunatic behind the cancer death list called “the other burzynski patient group” – He’s a very unstable and sick person.

Skeptics are nasty name-callers

BOb_AgencyTweet Screen shot 2012-11-07 at 10.07.46 AM Screen shot 2012-11-08 at 10.48.56 AM Screen shot 2012-12-17 at 8.46.24 AM Rat_CallsPatientsActors

Peter Bowditch aka “Rat Bags” is one of the meanest, sociopaths out there on the internet in regards to harassing people suffering from cancer. Dr. David Gorski aka Orac and Blob Blaskiewicz do not hold a candle to this guy. Orac/Gorski and Blob wish they would have been a part of Hitler’s SS brigade—but Peter Bowditch, he wishes he could be SATAN himself.  Ratbags_CallsLauraInventedStoryScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.03.20 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.03.59 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.04.20 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.06.33 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.07.15 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.09.49 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.27.55 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.28.04 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.28.12 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.49.37 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.50.44 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.52.24 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.53.08 AMScreen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.54.24 AM

Screen shot 2012-11-07 at 2.56.49 AM Screen shot 2012-11-07 at 3.02.49 AM rys_morgan_Burzynski

orac_gorski_burzynski_douchebag

“Dr.” David Gorski is the highest paid of them all. Writing under two names #1 “Dr.” David Gorski (where he pretends to not be a hateful bigot); and #2 “ORAC” where under his fake name, unleashes a fury of paid bigotry and hate unmatched by the late Adolf Hitler. 

They are well-organized, much like teh Westboro Church are well-organized

Just a small collection of the ranting tweets of hate from the Astroturf campaign known as “The Skeptics” towards scientific innovation that competes with the status quo, with a heavy focus on Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski and any of his patients. The Cancer Industry relies on such campaigns coupled with their Guerrilla-style internet vandalism tactics to highjack the search engines with slanted, biased, straw man, and often falsified information. You will notice they will never address a root argument. They rely only on bigoted and Chauvinist remarks, feeding on the fear in people – instead of rational and reasonable discussion. It is only a matter of time before they begin picketing the funerals of cancer patients. 

I read this quote on The Burzynski Movie Facebook page recently, and though it was quite fitting for this post:

“Taking one simple glance at history—using simple common sense—we will find that everything of scientific innovation has come from the fringe, and directly threatened the status quo at the start. From The Wright Brothers to Steve Jobs – they were all once considered “fringe mavericks” until their efforts merged into the mainstream and became a participant in the “status quo”. The status quo is there to create its own legion of followers, while only those who dare to step out of it and take a risk with something that could change it—those are the only people in human history that have ever contributed to changing it. These innovators didn’t listen to anyone except their own hearts and minds—while ignoring all the noise around them.” (this quote was apparently film director Eric Merola’s quote)

• RELATED ARTICLE: WIKIPEDIA ASTROTURFING (wikipedia)

• Example Astroturfing consulting firm  Dianthus Medical

Eric Merola – Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II – Documentary Review and Interview June 1, 2013 – Film / Movie

Eric Merola – Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II – Interview and Movie Review – June 1, 2013

“They [Astroturf / Skeptics] always resort to character assassinations, and try their best to distract from the actual subject matter—which is understandable, and fits their agenda. You can’t win a battle of misinformation by addressing truth, you can only do it by distracting from it. And as soon as anyone bothers to counter their “arguments” and prove them wrong on anything, they stop with that particular “argument” and move on to their next invented “argument”. They just keep moving the goal posts. Again and again. You can’t win; the biggest mistake anyone can make is to engage them. They want you to engage them—like the bullies in the school yard trying to make you flinch. At the end of the day, they will always end up metaphorically stealing your lunch money—by wasting as much of your precious time as they can.”

Original Posting: http://trustmovies.blogspot.com/2013/06/part-ii-of-one-of-most-important-docs.html

June 1, 2013 Movie Film Review of Burzynski: Part II (Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II)

By James Maanen of Trust Movies:

merola_humandoc_2011-1

Boy, you have been spending a lot of time on this film — in addition to all you put in on Part I. 

Yes—the Burzynski saga has been going on for nearly 40 years now. I started cold calling the Burzynski Clinic back in 2007, and they had zero interest in speaking to me. They had no idea who I was, and frankly I don’t blame them. I had never directed my own documentary before, my only credits included some work on some PBS documentaries and Michael Moore’s films. After about a year of persistence, Burzynski finally allowed me into his world.

After the release of the first documentary in 2010, I immediately began working on “Part II”.

The first documentary was more of a historical and biographical story of the struggles and battles that allowed Dr. Burzynski to freely allow his “Antineoplastons (ANP)” invention to enter America’s Food & Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval process. This film also included the plight of many of the cancer patients throughout this time period—many of whom were instrumental in winning numerous monumental legal battles with the FDA. For “Part 1”, aside from curing incurable cancers, I was fascinated by the fact that a single scientist stood up to the FDA and defeated them in not one, but two federal juried trials. The most stunning thing about those court battles was—the prosecution refused to allow whether the therapy worked or not into the trials! (Click to see Source.) The trials were merely about “interstate commerce”, accusing Burzynski of shipping his medications across Texas state lines, breaking Federal Law. Two sets of juries reached a “not guilty” verdict related to these charges.

For me the the highlight/low-light of your first film was seeing the collusion involved — when they are unable to discredit his work, they try to steal it!  

For me, too. Perhaps the most stunning aspect of “Part 1,” is where I was able to prove how the very same agencies trying to imprison Burzynski for the rest of his life for “interstate commerce”, were also colluding with one of Burzynski’s own research scientists as well as The Department Of Health and Human Services to file duplicate patents of already existing patents of one of his Antineoplastons’ medications, “AS2-1”!

Part I can be seen on Netflix, DVD, and other distribution outlets, and the entire film is backed up and sourced for transparent fact-checking by anyone—including the patent situation. Every document used in the film are available—in context—for anyone to scrutinize and fact-check for themselves. I knew I had to back up everything in this documentary since most people would find corruption of this magnitude simply too hard to believe at face value. (Click for Source.)

For “Part II”, I not only wanted to make a modern story of the current status of clinical testing of Antineoplastons—but also roll the dice and follow patients from diagnosis, and throughout their journey using Antineoplastons. Some of them came out cancer-free, and some died. This therapy is not a “miracle cure” nor is it in any way a “magic bullet”. It works for some, and not for others.

Do you think this film can stand alone? It seems to me that you really should see Part One first.

Since this saga has been going on for nearly 4 decades, it’s impossible to cover everything in one film, and especially in a sequel. I feel “Part II” stands on its own, but anyone who is interested in this story will really want to see “Part I”, to understand the background. Again, I wanted to document a “modern story”, and not harp on the past—I wanted to make a documentary where once it was released, all its contents occurred within the last 24-36 months. The last scene in the film occurred in January of 2013, for instance.

Another big difference between this new film and the first one is—the first film focused on Burzynski’s history—”Part II” focuses on the patients. For Part II, I also managed to get oncologists, surgeons, neurosurgeons and other medical professionals who witnessed their patients leave their care, headed to Hospice, only to return cancer-free.

Another aspect that will take many viewers who are familiar with this story by surprise—is Burzynski’s work on what he calls “Personalized Gene-Targeted Therapy”. In a nutshell, how this works is: the patient is diagnosed via biopsy by a third party cancer center—(Dr. Burzynski has never diagnosed anyone, all cancer patients that seek the therapy of the Burzynski Clinic come to the clinic already diagnosed by usually more than 2 outside cancer institutions like MD Anderson or Sloan-Kettering)—a sample of that biopsy is sent to one of the cutting-edge gene-testing labs that are emerging around the country more and more today, coupled with a blood sample that is sent to another lab. These genetic labs are able to scan the biopsy sample and the blood sample to recognize what genes relate to that individual person’s cancer. From there, Burzynski and his medical team design a “personalized gene-targeted” regimen using any number of the 40+ gene targeted cancer drugs on the market today. Burzynski also includes a substance called “Phenylbutyrate (PB)” which is a “pre-metabolite” of one of his initial Antineoplastons’ invention, AS2-1. When the patient takes PB orally, it metabolizes in the liver into AS2-1. The oral form (PB) isn’t as powerful as just giving AS2-1 intravenously, but under FDA sanctions Burzynski isn’t allowed to give anyone the genuine infusions of AS2-1 without FDA’s permission. (The FDA holds full dictatorial rights over what Burzynski can and can’t do with ANP).

While this “personalized gene targeted therapy” doesn’t hold the power that his original ANP invention holds—it’s a cutting edge new direction that has been considered by some of the top oncologists in the world as “the future of cancer therapy”. Burzynski has been practicing this method since the late 1990’s—MD Anderson is finally catching up, finishing their new “personalized gene-targeted cancer center” in 2014. Most importantly, it’s a new direction away from the cookie-cutter, conveyor belt of blindly giving everyone with a particular cancer diagnosis standard chemotherapy and radiation, without an ounce of an idea if it will be efficacious for that patient. This new “personalized” direction has more of a “targeted” purpose. They weed out the drugs that most likely will not benefit the patient, and include the drugs that most likely will. (Ideally, since Antineoplastons are shown to target as many as 90+ genes related to certain cancers, it would be ideal to combine Antineoplastons as well as the “personalized gene-targeted therapy” to give the patient the most optimum chance at winning their battle against their cancer—but we are worlds away from getting to that point given the strict sanctions the FDA currently holds over Antineoplastons alone).

Most amazing of all in “Part II”—for me—was my travels to Japan interviewing and meeting a team of pathologists, oncologists, radiologists, surgeons, neurosurgeons, PhD biochemists, and anesthesiologists at the Kurume Medical Center in Fukuoka, Japan. This team did something that no other medical research team has had the courage to do, at least not at this scale. They underwent 27 years of independent studies of Antineoplastons, starting from mice studies in the 1980’s, then Phase 1 human trials (testing toxicity), Phase 2 human trials (testing efficacy), and finally the first ever randomized human clinical trials—for colon cancer with metastasis to the liver, lungs and brain.

The “randomized trial” was created by the world’s scientific community to eliminate “bias” and “anecdotal data”. As Dr. Hideaki Tsuda from my film says, “Anecdotal data gives birth to the scientific mind. But recording anecdotal data again and again, isn’t convincing. You have to create the randomized study where the patients are arranged randomly and no one knows who is getting just chemotherapy and who is also getting the experimental medications (in this case, Antineoplastons). We did exactly this, and after 27 years of independently testing Antineoplastons, it’s clear to us that Antineoplastons are now considered a proven therapy, and its results can no longer be considered anecdotal.”

Oh, but that doesn’t count, ’cause we beat out Japan in World War II, right? 

(Merola chuckles) What is interesting about these Japanese studies is: They were truly independent, and were not done under Burzynski’s supervision or advice whatsoever. Speaking to Burzynski about these monumental independent randomized trials conducted by the Japanese, Burzynski said “They didn’t use the 24 hour infusions as I have done since the 1980’s, they only gave the patients one week of arm injections of ANP, and then one year of oral pills of ANP. If they used the infusions as I have designed, their results would have been far better.”

While this is true that the Japanese ignored all of Burzynski’s recommended protocols for their human studies—and chose to design their own, the fact that they had double the survival rate in the Antineoplaston group vs. the chemotherapy alone group—that is pretty darn incredible. I can only imagine how the patients would have fared under the infusions. What is also remarkable about these Japanese studies is the fact that this medical team are not “alternative” scientists, they are orthodox medical doctors and scientists. And as such, they insisted on combining chemotherapy with both the control and Antineoplaston groups. The Japanese insist that Antineoplastons work very well in connection with chemotherapy—as chemotherapy is “reactive” and “kills”, while Antineoplastons are “non-reactive” and “occupy the space and reprograms the cells”. They feel that the easiest way to ease Antineoplastons into the mainstream medical profession is to start there—combine it with chemotherapy. In some ways I agree from a “paradigm-shift” stand point. Telling an oncologist to throw his chemotherapy into the garbage and start using only Antineoplastons overnight—from a bureaucratic standpoint—is next to impossible. This Japanese oncology medical research team firmly feel that Antineoplastons are a perfect complement to standard chemotherapy.

England features more prominently in this edition than in the first one. 

All four patients I followed the closest happened to be from the United Kingdom. Some of these patients were cancer-free at the end of our journeys together, and some died. This therapy is not a magic bullet, but when you are told by your oncologist “you are going to die, we can’t save you”, and then they opt as a last resort for the Burzynski Clinic, and that patient comes out cancer-free, that is remarkable. Especially since all four of these particular patients were diagnosed with incurable brain tumors.

Focusing heavily on the United Kingdom patients wasn’t planned, but it’s just the way the story went. So I made best use of my time over there. I actually found the British to be more resourceful than most of the American patients. Many American patients in general put a lot of blind faith in Burzynski (they also put a lot of blind faith in their regular oncologists too), while the English really did their homework. The English were far more skeptical and came to their treatment choice only after weeks of research and scrutiny of Burzynski and his therapy methods. Maybe it’s because Americans are living under the delusion that they have a “choice” in their cancer therapies—due to all the indoctrination that Americans live in a free country—and the British just know they have no choice in their cancer therapy—given the socialized system there. I am not knocking socialized medicine—all I am saying is, if any country has socialized medicine, the “cook book, conveyor belt, blind administration of chemotherapy and radiation” protocols given to everyone will be the only option for that population—unless they go private, which most people can’t afford. Any medical system where the government dictates its scientific protocols pretty much automatically excludes anything “out of the box” or “innovative.”

One thing I was particularly impressed with is how much of a fighter Laura Hymas really is! 

Yes, she is. Another aspect of this new documentary I am most proud of, is how much documentation I was able to obtain related to Laura Hymas’ story. After Laura was deemed incurable by her oncologists, and decided to raise money to travel to Houston to get Antineoplastons at the Burzynski Clinic, I have National UK TV news clips essentially telling its audience Laura is going to die, two-page national magazine spreads saying “How am I going to tell my son I am going to die”, the list goes on. The British media had a frenzy over Laura when she was first diagnosed—and ever more so when it was realized that she wanted to go to some Polish doctor in Houston Texas . Her story was a super tragic story—she was diagnosed with an incurable Glioblastoma Multiforme Grade IV brain tumor on Christmas Eve, she had an 18 month old son, was having 40 seizures a day due to her tumor’s location—the media loved it, as they always love to report on tragedies. (Of course, once her tumor began to shrink using Antineoplastons, and her tumor is now completely gone—the British media wants nothing to do with her!)

There is another aspect to Laura’s story included in this new documentary that I will not tell your readers about—I’ll let it be a surprise—but I will say that never before in documentary history has any documentary obtained and included such a profound piece of material. Everyone that sees the film is floored by this piece of material. I am still pinching myself that I was able to obtain it—much less include it.

Can we talk about these “Astroturf campaigners,” which you spend some time on in Part Two?

Yes. They ironically call themselves “The Skeptics”. (I have found that we should be wary of any organized group that labels itself after a pre-existing attribute of the human condition). They pretend to be patient advocates protecting people. In reality, they are there to stop people from seeking Burzynski’s therapy. However, Burzynski isn’t alone. Any therapy that is not invented, approved, packaged, marketed, and sold by the pharmaceutical industry—is automatically a “quack therapy” by default in their eyes. They have even attacked the world-famous Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City for giving their terminal cancer patients the option of choosing yoga, meditation, and acupuncture—over traditional highly addictive narcotic pain medications. These so-called Skeptics have roundly accused Sloan-Kettering of quackery for daring to give their patients a choice in pain management. In the Skeptics point of view “all cancer patients are prisoners, and they must receive the cook book pharmaceuticals and if they or anyone even thinks of altering that cookie-cutter plan—off with their heads!” These people have zero tolerance of any sort of freedom—when it comes to medical choices—or one’s freedom of speech. But then again, that is their job. Burzynski is merely in the blender with the rest of those innovators who dare deter from the norm—since Burzynski’s therapy also isn’t packaged and produced by one of the top pharma companies.

The whole goal of the Astroturf campaign is to manipulate other unsuspecting and naive members of the public—and then recruit and build their army that way. Not all of the so-called skeptics are on a discreet payroll, perhaps only a handful of them at the top. But this really isn’t the most important thing—as using fake advocacy groups to push an agenda is the pharmaceutical company’s oldest trick in its toolbox. Former editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine—Marcia Angell—has written extensively how the pharmaceutical industry has created dozens upon dozens of fake advocacy groups to fight their battles and defend their own interests (Read Dr. Angell’s “The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It”).

It would only make sense that such a force would exist, I mean after all—imagine if Antineoplastons were released onto the market—being a proven gentle and effective therapy—and you as a cancer patient had that choice over the ancient toxic carcinogenic chemotherapies and radiation… which one would you choose? The industry knows this, and they will do whatever it takes to stop it—and polluting the internet with noise to confuse everyone is a very effective strategy.

But they don’t stop at just polluting the internet, for instance, when PBS in Colorado aired the first documentary during a fund-raiser earlier this year, all these Astroturf/Skeptics got together and hounded PBS: calling and telling them, “You can’t air this!” Of course PBS isn’t going to listen to a bunch of random angry ranting yahoos, so they aired it anyway. But then, after airing, this group continued calling, emailing, and harassing the PBS staff to the point where they convinced the PBS Ombudsman to apologize for airing it, which he did! I guess if you harass someone long enough, they will eventually give in, just to silent the relentless badgering. These “Skeptics” have even called my film’s distributors, harassing them! Any time my film airs anywhere these guys get together and launch a campaign of hate and lies toward the distributor providing the service. Free speech is certainly not something the “skeptics” hold sacred.

Have these “skeptics” taken some of the wind out of your sails. 

Frankly, I couldn’t care less about them, and I had no intention of covering them in my film. I really wanted to tell the patients’ side of this story here—but the patients kept complaining about “The Skeptics”, so I felt I had to include them. First they kept telling Laura that she would die if she used Burzynski. Once she was cured, of course, they shut up. And now it’s like she never even existed. While other “Skeptics” say Laura was just pretending to have cancer, and she is just a money launderer for Burzynski. (I wonder what Laura’s neurosurgeon who performed her biopsy confirming her Glioblastoma Multiforme Grade IV diagnosis—who I interviewed and included in my new documentary—would have to say about that?!)

The Skeptics only care and get excited about patients who die under Burzynski’s therapy, think about trying Burzynski’s therapy and die before they can get there, or people that “choose the smart path” and die under the hands of chemotherapy and radiation. That would make sense, since that is what fits their agenda. Anyone who is cured by Burzynski’s therapy—those people don’t exist to them.

To give you an example, if you decide to cover this film, and your online review allows comments on its webpage, and you publish them, your page will be filled with the same Astroturf/Skeptics, saying the same stuff, calling Burzynski a quack, scam, con artist whose works have never been published, etc etc . They will say I was paid to make these films, the films are infomercials, etc etc. You will notice that one thing none of them will do—is address the films themselves. They always resort to character assassinations, and try their best to distract from the actual subject matter—which is understandable, and fits their agenda. You can’t win a battle of misinformation by addressing truth, you can only do it by distracting from it. And as soon as anyone bothers to counter their “arguments” and prove them wrong on anything, they stop with that particular “argument” and move on to their next invented “argument”. They just keep moving the goal posts. Again and again. You can’t win; the biggest mistake anyone can make is to engage them. They want you to engage them—like the bullies in the school yard trying to make you flinch. At the end of the day, they will always end up metaphorically stealing your lunch money—by wasting as much of your precious time as they can.

Do you think there will be a Part Three to this story and to your filmmaking? 

If something big happens, there might be a 3rd Burzynski film from me. Not until then. Until something really changes, at least, I’ve reported on the situation as much as I can. Frankly, until everyone knows who Burzynski and what Antineoplastons are, until the population rises up and takes charge of the situation, until something really changes, I don’t see the point of doing another documentary on this subject just now. I am very passionate about this subject matter, and it’s occupied all of my time over the last 6 years, but I don’t want to just report on Burzynski and his patients the rest of my life. There are many other stories to tell, and I also want to write and direct my own original scripted narrative films, too.

If this is it for you (and the Burzynski subject) for a while, where does it leave you in regards to the subject itself?

I will say, this whole experience has been a huge life-changing catharsis for me. We’re all so used to corruption these days. People shrug their shoulders and say “well, that’s the way it is!” People cannot imagine that this same corruption that we get in politics and business every day is occurring in relation to a life-threatening disease like cancer. Back in the day, there was no awareness campaign to get penicillin or insulin on the market. Today, anyone who even thinks about advancing the therapies of anything—given the stranglehold the market has on everything related to science—especially in cancer, is immediately marginalized because advancing the therapies isn’t the name of the game—keeping things the same is the name of the game. They don’t call it an establishment for nothing—these therapies are established and they are here to stay. Protecting the establishment and the status quo is the job of today’s governments and industries—their job is not to change it—things are working just perfect for the status quo—and changing it by doing something drastic like adding Antineoplastons onto the free market—within an existing failing, yet highly profitable system—really screws up what has been already established.

For example, David Axelrod – a top political adviser to both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama – he saw the first film, and said, “yes, it is very, very important, but it is just “too big” for our government to get involved in right now. Maybe in 10 years we can face it, but not right now.”

Lastly on this subject, anyone that says “what! no one would ever block a cure for cancer!”—needs to remember one thing, that their response is an emotional one, not a scientific one. Saying “I can’t believe the FDA would do this—or do that” – is just that, your “belief”. It is an emotional response and isn’t based in fact. If one actually practices the scientific method in researching this subject, and ignores their emotion while researching it—they will find this reality to be as apparent as the sky is blue on a sunny day.

Quick example: Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper introduced into law HR 3472 in 2009. This newly proposed law said basically that if you can prove through your family doctor that you lead a healthy lifestyle, you are then entitled to discounts on your health insurance premiums. This law never made it to the Congressional floor—why? Because The American Cancer Society and The American Heart Association teamed up and blocked it! That’s right, the two largest advocacy groups for heart health and cancer therapy and prevention blocked a bill that would likely reduce heart disease and new cancer diagnoses. What does that single little event tell you? (Think logically about your answer to that—not emotionally). Even more telling is the fact that not a single mainstream TV news outlet touched this story, the only entity to cover it was The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. (Click for Source.) Oh, and Ms. Dahlkemper was never reelected for her seat after that…

Yes, like those banks that are too big (and too criminal) to fail, but our government refuses to go after them. And, speaking of: That government is clearly already involved here via the FDA not allowing certain things to happen, and by Texas law enforcement constantly try to shut the doctor down. 

Right. But maybe in 10 years, Axelrod says, maybe then we can face it. If this therapy is unleashed now, it would destroy the current cancer drug market.

As dark and horrible as this sounds, through my journey of following this story and watching the pure hell these patients had to go through just to get the therapy, not to mention fighting their cancer itself—what I now believe is that something as innovative as Burzynski’s therapy is not meant to go to market now—not yet. Right now, it’s only for the very affluent—those who can afford such luxuries—the ones that are smarter than the rest—and the ones who simply “know better.” I used to think that this fight could be won—and maybe it can—but the American public is just far too complacent to actually put up any sort of fight, and the regulatory agencies and industry are far too corrupted and in bed together to allow this therapy into their so-called “free market.” I came to that conclusion by listening to the logical and scientific side of my brain—not the emotional side.

Burzynski’s invention isn’t alone—there are a handful of other extremely effective and highly advanced cancer therapies left under the radar that we can all gain access to, if we know where to look and want them bad enough. What is happening to Burzynski is far from a one-time anomaly.

This is simply the world in which we live.

Well, we know how despicable our own government can be in so many other ways. Now we can add this to the mix. Thanks so much for you time, Eric. And especially, thank you for your yeoman work on these two films—which brings to the public information that it desperately needs to know.

My pleasure. All I can say to everyone reading this: Think for yourself. Question everything, including me and my films. Feel free to fact check anything within the films—and don’t take anything at face value, especially from “The Skeptics.” Research, make up your own mind—and that doesn’t mean stopping at a Wikipedia page and saying “Well, that’s that! Wikipedia said it so it must be true! I’m done with my research!”

Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business, Part II 
releases throughout North America, United Kingdom, 
Australia, Ireland, New Zealand and more via TV and online 
“On Demand/Pay Per View” on June 1, 2013. 
 The DVD is also for sale shipping July 1, 2013. 
 For more info, click here
B2_Poster_2013_aperture