[QLP]

Has anyone been following this story which seems to have been rumbling on for years?

Burzynski The Movie - Cancer Is Serious Business - NaturalNews.tv

It's a long film but I found it very interesting.

[tomder55]

Can you give us a summary of the issue ?

[NeedKarma]

Here's the wiki on the doctor which references the issue: Stanislaw Burzynski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[tomder55]

I still don't know the issue... is it that the FDA is taking too long to approve the therapy ?

[NeedKarma]

I think he's been doing it without approval FDA approval and is in legal trouble.

[QLP]

Well basically the claims of the film, and I cannot say how accurate they are go something like this:

Burzynski develops new cancer treatment which is safer and more effective than chemo and radiotherapy.
Various supporting patient statements and studies.
FDA tries all means to shut him down, many spurious methods employed, because they don't want a single doctor, who holds the patent, taking away big bucks from big pharma.
Dr B is faced with several legal battles. Is found not guilty by grand jury 4 or 5 times. FDA refuses to allow proper clinical trials.

Meanwhile US government tries to steal his patents.

FDA eventually agress to clinical trials due to pressure from patients and othe interested bodies. FDA alters protocols so that the trials will fail.

There's quite a lot more than that but the major implication is that for 40 or more years an individual doctor has held the secret to a safe and effective cancer treatment which has been systematically blocked by the FDA and other government departments for political reasons and they want to discredit, de-licence and incarcerate said doctor so they can steal his patents.

Like I said I don't know what the truth is but found it interesting and wondered whether our American members know more...

[QLP]

This covers much of the history:

FDA

[tomder55]

Have heard similar claims for years about alternative therapy . The last one was shark cartilage .

Damned if you do ;damned if you don't .
How many treatments and medicines have the FDA approved for use that turned out harmful after approval ? In those cases they get accused of a fast track approach .

There is a another op that brought up baby cribs that had been marketted for generations . Suddenly they are no good.

I don't have an answer for you. Aspirin is turning out to be a miracle drug. If it was a new drug today it would take years of research, and would probably be assigned a prescription status . There would be 30 seconds of disclaimers on a typical 1 minute ad ;and maybe it would not even be approved because some patients can't stomach the drug.Oh yeah ;the cost of the research would be absorbed into the price of the product.

[QLP]

But surely the way to find out if drugs are effective is to do clinical trials not block them?
And if patients have been testifying for 40 years that it has saved their lives, when they had been diagnosed terminal, shouldn't the FDA be a little bit interested in that?

This comment,'Govt. Lawyers file motions to keep all evidence of efficacy out of the upcoming trial (scheduled for Jan. 6, 1997). According to the govt. allowing jurors to see such evidence "is a thinly-veiled effort to expose the jury to the specter of Dr. Burzynski in the act of saving lives. Permitting it will certainly infect the jury's consideration of the real issues with irrelevant, emotional, prejudicial and misleading concerns regarding whether antineoplaston works and the unfortunate fate of Dr. Burzynski's patients." seems to suggest that the decisions have little to do with safety and efficacy.

[tomder55]

NK's wiki link says a number of clinicals are underway or have been concluded.

There is a process for approval that I think the doctor is trying to bypass. Like I said ;approvals today are a rediculously long process. But the way liabilities are ,who can blame a cautious approach ?

[QLP]

There is a table at the bottom of this document showing average FDA approval times:

Fast Track, Accelerated Approval and Priority Review

They fall a long way short of 30-40 years.

Dr B and his colleagues maintain that the FDA are refusing to run the trials adequately and that they are doing all they can to meet the FDA demands short of deliberately endangering patient lives, something which the FDA seems to be happy to do. As I said I don't know the truth.

[QLP]

I have seen this claim made in several places:

“NCI patent applications for drugs that precisely duplicate Burzynski’s drugs establish that the government knows this drug works!” charges Elias. “It is clear from an NCI response to my FOIA request that the FDA prosecuted Burzynski in hopes of putting him away somewhere where he could not protect his patents!”

Source: Antineoplastons and Dr. Burzynski | wellnesswillpower.com

No idea how to check that out properly though.