Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Cancer Cure - The Movie  
User currently offlineoly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6604 posts, RR: 11
Posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1240 times:

Never heard of this cancer treatment before, and given what's been written it's no surprise. Vested interests try to rule once again.

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.


http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...011/06/11/burzynski-the-movie.aspx


wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18699 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1201 times:

Quoting oly720man (Thread starter):

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.

Ooh! A conspiracy! The evil FDA is hiding the Cure For Cancer from the unsuspecting public!

And it's bullstool.

First of all, and I have to keep on telling people this: THERE IS NO SUCH DISEASE AS "CANCER." Talking about a "cure for cancer" is exactly as nonsensical as talking about a "cure for fever."

The condition called "cancer" is a set of many different diseases all of which result from the same basic process, which is uncontrolled cell proliferation. To suggest that any one therapy can cure all of them is as absurd as suggesting that any one antibiotic can cure all bacterial infections.

In fact, "antineoplastons" have been extensively studied and they DO. NOT. WORK. What they do work very nicely for is to make Burzynski's wallet (and that of his private clinics in Texas) very fat. The "research" he published is irreproducible and probably fraudulent, although his notes are apparently non-existent so there's no way to prove that.

There are a ton of people out there who have dedicated their lives to researching and finding cures for various sorts of cancers. The idea that all of these people, who were young and idealistic college and Ph.D. or medical students all of whom wanted to attack this disease, many of whom lost friends and loved ones to cancer, many of whom are survivors themselves, are all in some conspiracy to withhold a life-saving therapy from the general populace is absurd. It's as absurd as chemtrails.

There are a lot of "quackumentaries" out there. There's one about "Chronic Lyme," in spite of the fact that the progressive degenerative neurological and functional diseases presented in the movie are so painfully obviously diagnoses other than "Lyme." There are ones positing that there's a cure for AIDS (which is, of course, not caused by HIV). There are ones showing how awful and damaging vaccines are. They are full of lies, and often there are a few doctors in there who profit from the desperation of patients, the fame, the notoriety and they are complicit in these damaging movies. Some of them have lost their licenses, but that just makes them martyrs.

My advice is not to watch them.


User currently offlineLemmy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1172 times:

Excellent post, Doc. More here:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/...hp/why-havent-we-cured-cancer-yet/



I am a patient boy ...
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18699 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1151 times:

I understand why people are frustrated at the pace of cancer research, but it's pretty impressive.

Until 1970, most cancers were incurable if they were inoperable. There were no medical therapies for any sort of cancer. But in the 1970's and 80's the first rudimentary modern chemotherapies became available. The side-effects were atrocious. Many patients refused therapy after the first course and chose to die rather than endure such sickness.

Over the years, the therapies have gotten more targeted. The side-effects can be ameliorated better. There is progress being made.

It's a pleasant fantasy that there is one easy, side-effect-free, guaranteed (or even high-hoping) cure. But cancer isn't that simple. It's going to take time, lots of research, and slow progress. There are new advances every day, new drugs, new attack techniques, new tools in our arsenal. The first monoclonal antibodies are hitting the market. Tetanus and botulinum fusion toxoids might be able to introduce iRNA into target cells. Horribly toxic agents (like radioactivity) can be safely shuttled to the correct site, avoiding most of the other tissues.

The tricks we can do today are amazing, ingenious, and elegant, our mastery becoming finer and finer. One-by-one, we will beat each cancer. But there are hundreds of them, so it's going to take a very long time.


User currently offlineFerminios From Canada, joined Apr 2011, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1119 times:

I'm no medical expert - so what I'm going to write here are just some of my own observations.

First, I watched a big part of the documentary yesterday, and I would say that some of the stuff that comes up about the FDA was pretty shocking to me, but I realized that everything was put there really to make a case "Burzynski vs the Beagle Boys". Some quotes may be a bit out of context but after I heard about the food section of the FDA (Watch Food inc. ), it doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

However, I must say that I find it difficult to also believe that antineoplastons do not work. Somehow these people are still alive, and I find it very hard to believe that they would fake these healings. Of course, it's a bit of a stretch to call it the solution to everything, but these people do suggest that it may be effective for certain forms (primarily brain tumors as suggested in the documentary)

Once again, I'm not a medical expert   . Cancer research of course needs to continue, because if this was the miracle we had been waiting for, we would probably have known by now.


User currently offlineFingerLakerAv8r From United States of America, joined May 2011, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1088 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
My advice is not to watch them.

Why not? Other than you personal opinions of course. I have watched a lot of these other documentaries and I have taken most of them with a grain of salt but there are some good points that are raised that makes you think about the subject matter at hand. I think you do yourself a disservice by not watching these documentaries and only seeing one side of the story. You don't have to agree with other opinions but you can fully understand the concept with a better understanding of all viewpoints.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
In fact, "antineoplastons" have been extensively studied and they DO. NOT. WORK. What they do work very nicely for is to make Burzynski's wallet (and that of his private clinics in Texas) very fat. The "research" he published is irreproducible and probably fraudulent, although his notes are apparently non-existent so there's no way to prove that.

So if they don't work this is because of your own personal research right? That you've done in your lab? Can you speak on behalf of his wallet? Irreproducible based on your personal observations or the statements and research of others? Probably fradulent or not? It's gotta be one or the other.

Now Doc I am not hatin' on you or anyone else in the medical establishment. I just play devil's advocate very well. I may not have any formal medical training but I do have my own personal opinions based on research that I have done. When it comes to a cancer diagnosis I personally have witnessed remission in family members who chose the traditional path as well as family members who chose a more holistic approach. I've witnessed miracle on both sides of the argument so who am I (or any of us for that matter) to judge what path of care people want to take?


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21353 posts, RR: 54
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1061 times:

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 5):
When it comes to a cancer diagnosis I personally have witnessed remission in family members who chose the traditional path as well as family members who chose a more holistic approach.

As far as I'm aware sporadic remissions do happen, usually independently of any discernible circumstance or treatment; As far as I know there is none of these "miracle cures" which has ever been confirmed to have a consistently positive effect on cancer (and many of them have negative ones!).

If someone tries to sell miracle cures to you on the basis of only a single or a statistically insignificant number of samples, discard it – it's nothing but hot air.


User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10728 posts, RR: 38
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1020 times:

This is all over the internet. There was Mirko Beljanski (RIP) and his miracle cancer cures - now there is Burzyinski with his mracle cancer cure.

My humble opinion on this... if these cures had proven true they would be used everywhere all over the world. I am not one who supports Big Pharma but I don't go the other extreme either. Some degree of wisdom and moderation is necessary. If miracle cures existed, we would all know about them.

The Beljanskis, Burziyinskis and others are out there to advertise themselves and make money. I doubt if the poor woman/man shows up to his clinic asking for free treatment they will be sent off to the races.

 Wow!



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineFingerLakerAv8r From United States of America, joined May 2011, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1007 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 6):
As far as I'm aware sporadic remissions do happen, usually independently of any discernible circumstance or treatment; As far as I know there is none of these "miracle cures" which has ever been confirmed to have a consistently positive effect on cancer (and many of them have negative ones!).

I am sure my family member who chose the holistic approach would kindly disagree with it being a sporadic remission considering it was 12 odd years ago. But on the other hand my other family memebr who chose the traditional path had been going strong for 7 years. So who knows? To each their own I guess.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21353 posts, RR: 54
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1001 times:

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 8):
I am sure my family member who chose the holistic approach would kindly disagree with it being a sporadic remission considering it was 12 odd years ago.

"Sporadic" in this context meaning accidentally, without discernible connection to any treatment or circumstance.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18699 posts, RR: 58
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 956 times:

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 5):
So if they don't work this is because of your own personal research right? That you've done in your lab?

No, because of independent studies that have been done in other peoples' labs. Because of a complete lack of reliable results.

What are you getting at?

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 5):
I've witnessed miracle on both sides of the argument so who am I (or any of us for that matter) to judge what path of care people want to take?

I am certainly entitled to judge people who peddle unproven and horribly expensive ($100K+) treatments that are peddled to the sick and the desperate in an attempt to defraud them out of their money. Insurance doesn't cover these treatments because they don't work. Say what you will about inscos, but they truly are the masters of cold-hearted, hard data on cost/benefit. In fact, they often have the best postmarketing data available on the efficacy and risks of any treatment.

In my opinion, anyone doing this is evil and really ought to be stopped.

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 5):
I have watched a lot of these other documentaries and I have taken most of them with a grain of salt but there are some good points that are raised that makes you think about the subject matter at hand.

No. If they tell an outright lie (and in this case, they have), then NOTHING they say can be trusted. If they say that the clear sky is blue, then you'd better go outside and make sure.

Science depends on honesty. It depends on everyone telling the truth in their publications. Yes, there are errors made, statistical quirks, and such. That's why peer review is so essential. But when people start manufacturing data, making false claims, inventing citations that don't exist, then anything else they say is suspect and worthless.


User currently offlineFingerLakerAv8r From United States of America, joined May 2011, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 918 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 10):
What are you getting at?

Davils advocate, nothing more nothing less

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 10):
I am certainly entitled to judge people who peddle unproven and horribly expensive ($100K+) treatments that are peddled to the sick and the desperate in an attempt to defraud them out of their money

The hell you are allowed to judge anybody...period. Weather you agree with them or not. You can state opinions about them but none of us are in a postion to judge anyone, anywhere ever. I personally don't agree with the movie in question but I certainly won't judge because it's not my job to do so. If someone want's to spend thousands of dollars on a different therapy (or thousands of dollars on traditional means) by all means let them. If thats what people want to do with their lives and their care then by all means let them do it and live our lives how we think is best for us.

None of us are getting out of here alive. To each their own.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21353 posts, RR: 54
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 910 times:

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 11):
If someone want's to spend thousands of dollars on a different therapy (or thousands of dollars on traditional means) by all means let them. If thats what people want to do with their lives and their care then by all means let them do it and live our lives how we think is best for us.

So you think fraudulent exploitation of desperate people should be tolerated?


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18699 posts, RR: 58
Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 887 times:

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 11):
The hell you are allowed to judge anybody...period. Weather you agree with them or not. You can state opinions about them but none of us are in a postion to judge anyone, anywhere ever.

I think I can make a judgement on people who harm others. Fraud certainly counts.


User currently offlineFingerLakerAv8r From United States of America, joined May 2011, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 865 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 12):
So you think fraudulent exploitation of desperate people should be tolerated?

Your interpretation may be that it is fradulent but to someone else they may think its a miracle.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
think I can make a judgement on people who harm others. Fraud certainly counts.


Certainly your opinion and you are entiltled to it. I will disagree but I will not fault your right to say it. But on the other side of the coin I hope you are equally judgemental on medical malpractice and negligence in the traditonal sense.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21353 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 854 times:

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 14):
Your interpretation may be that it is fradulent but to someone else they may think its a miracle.

Promising a high chance of recovery while knowing that such chance does not exist just for extracting money from desperate people is not just fraud as such, but among the most despicable kinds of fraud at that.


User currently offlineFingerLakerAv8r From United States of America, joined May 2011, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 835 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 15):
Promising a high chance of recovery while knowing that such chance does not exist just for extracting money from desperate people is not just fraud as such, but among the most despicable kinds of fraud at that.

I certainly don't disagree with some of this...

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 14):
Your interpretation may be that it is fradulent but to someone else they may think its a miracle.

But really.... what part of my last statement did you miss?? If someone I loved decided to take this route would I agree with them? Probably not. Would I talk to them about all their options? Certainly. But at very least if they made this decision and it gave them hope and strength to live then by all means hell yeah and go for it. I wouldn't think of them any differently and I certainly would be there if it didn't work.

And Klaus, if you think it's despicable and its terrible perhaps try contacting some of the people who are still alive and well and ask them if it's fraud or not. I'm quite sure you'd get and interesting conversation out of it   


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21353 posts, RR: 54
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 833 times:

Quoting FingerLakerAv8r (Reply 16):
And Klaus, if you think it's despicable and its terrible perhaps try contacting some of the people who are still alive and well and ask them if it's fraud or not. I'm quite sure you'd get and interesting conversation out of it

They could just as well have prayed or meditated to get the same (incidental) results, probably without the side effects and definitely without the loss of money they'd need for more urgent things.

And of course you can't ask the much larger number of people who've been financially stripped while dying anyway.

As I said: Remissions happen. In some cases because the scientific treatment simply worked, in others due to individual factors which had nothing to do with the "miracle cure".

Those fraudsters simply rely on the fact that dead people usually won't appear in video testimonials, so the much smaller number of cancer survivors (which is just as small as anywhere else) can be milked for publicity.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Alex Lifeson Of Rush In The Movie Suck posted Fri Aug 27 2010 17:53:08 by varigb707
The Movie - 3 Idiots. posted Wed Jan 13 2010 01:44:48 by HAWK21M
Think You Know Your Movies? I.D. The Movie Game! posted Sun Dec 20 2009 21:28:40 by FLY2HMO
Avatar The Movie, Will You See It? (reviewed) posted Sat Dec 19 2009 12:49:10 by FXramper
Anyone Seen The Movie Lakshya. posted Sun Sep 13 2009 11:46:14 by HAWK21M
District 9 - The Movie... What Do You Think? posted Tue Aug 11 2009 16:26:02 by Vio
New York [The Movie] posted Mon Jul 6 2009 01:13:37 by HAWK21M
Name The Movie Quote! posted Thu Apr 9 2009 20:40:18 by FXramper
The Movie Ghajini Rewrites Records. posted Sun Jan 11 2009 23:47:28 by HAWK21M
Mamma Mia! The Movie posted Sat Jul 19 2008 14:00:21 by Mt99