To fully utilize this article, click on the blue text to link to the source being discussed.
Susan Hale was diagnosed with a Glioblastoma Multiforme Grade IV brain tumor (which measured the size of a golf ball) in May, 1997 at 45 years old. After all other treatment failed, she began Antineoplaston treatment on August 10, 1998 and four months later she was cancer free. Susan Hale has been alive and cancer-free ever since.
#1 Diagnosis – After suffering from severe weakness and headaches, Susan Hale was admitted into the Torrence Medical Center Emergency Room in May, 1997 and an MRI was ordered by the on-call ER physician. The MRI revealed a tumor in the temporoparietal region on the right side of her brain. A craniotomy (surgery) to remove the tumor and a biopsy was performed by the Torrence pathologists and they diagnosed her with Glioblastoma Multiforme Grade IV brain cancer. [read May 5, 1997 pathology report – PDF].
#2 Prior Treatment – After the first May 1997 surgery failed to remove all of her tumor, Susan underwent 6 weeks of standard radiation treatment from May 12, 1997 to June 27, 1997. After radiation treatment failed to affect the tumor, Susan underwent gamma knife radiation on October 28, 1997. A followup MRI in February 1998 reported no change in her tumor. Another MRI in May 1998 revealed the tumor was still growing. Surgeons and Oncologists recommended a second craniotomy (surgery) which was performed on June 3, 1998 at USC University Hospital—which again only removed part of the tumor. Within a month another MRI revealed that the tumor was still growing. Surgeons advised surgery a third time, in which Susan Hale declined and decided to investigate other “outside” therapies. Despite two surgeries, a full course of standard radiation and gamma knife radiation, Susan Hale’s tumor continued to progress.
#5 FDA supervised clinical trial data comparing radiation, chemotherapy, and gene-targeted therapy (other than Antineoplastons) to Antineoplaston therapy for Glioblastoma Multiforme Grade IV – Radiation & Chemotherapy in 798 patients = 0% 5-year survival; Gene-targeted drugs other than Antineoplastons in 671 patients = 0% 5-year survival; 368 patients treated with Antineoplastons = 5.25% survival. [Read the full report – PDF].
It should be noted that Senator Ted Kennedy died of Glioblastoma Grade IV brain cancer. Countless Glioblastoma survivors cured by Antineoplastons as well as many other people cured of other types of cancer due to Antineoplastons flooded Kennedy’s office to share with him the existence of Antineoplastons. Mr. Kennedy’s wife wrote the Burzynski’s Clinic requesting all communication from Antineoplaston treated cancer survivors stop contacting his office entirely. A year later, Kennedy was dead.
Susan Hale’s medical records are published by written authorization by Susan Hale.
Mary Jo Siegel – Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma – cured – with medical records
To fully utilize this article, click on the blue text to link to the source being discussed.
Mary Jo Siegel was diagnosed with “Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, Stage IV, low grade small cleaved cell” in February of 1991.
She underwent surgery to remove part of her small intestine and mesenteric lymph nodes. By September 1991, she was found to have involvement in her bone marrow. The treatment options given to her was chemotherapy, radiation and a bone marrow transplant.
She refused all of these treatments and decided to undergo Dr. Burzynski’s Antineoplaston therapy on April 3, 1992. By December 1996 all of her cancer was gone. Mary Jo Siegel has been healthy and cancer-free ever since.
Mary Jo and Steve Siegel were two of the leaders in the fight in Washington DC and around the country during Dr. Burzynski’s indictment. Not only were they busy trying to defeat her disease, but they fought equally as hard to be able to have the right to even have access to Antineoplastons. The Siegels turned their home into a centralized home base for the nearly $700,000.00 raised for Burzynsk’s legal defense through Dr. Julian Whitaker’s Newsletter “Health and Healing” in the 1990s.
Given their leadership roles, they were featured on CBS News’ “48 Hours” on April 4, 1996. Watch below to view the segment.
Continuing Their Activism Role
The Siegel’s attended the Newport Beach Film Festival Screening and participated in a Q&A on April 25, 2010.
Twenty years ago, Mary Jo Siegel received the terrible news that she had stage IV low grade non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma. “I was told that I was going to die of the disease. I was stage IV, and the type of lymphoma that I had was always fatal,” she says. Siegel and her husband began researching the disease and traveled all over the country to see seven different lymphoma specialists. Because she lives in California, she chose a doctor at UCLA. After he told her that she would need a bone marrow transplant, Siegel and her husband went to the UCLA medical library to research the procedure (this was before the age of Internet accessibility). “We found out that one person out of ten died from the bone marrow transplant. I also knew from what the doctor was telling me that they would give me as much radiation as people who were within one mile of Hiroshima. I was also told that I would get high dose chemotherapy and that they would bring me as close to death as possible and then rescue me,” she remembers. “They also wanted me to sign a release that was about an inch thick. It said that within five years that there was a fifty percent chance that I would get another cancer and that it would affect my heart, lungs, kidneys – everything. So I would never be the same. But I thought that if this is the only thing that will save my life, then I am going to do it,” she says. “But we decided to search a little bit longer, and I heard about Dr. Burzynski. I was in a cancer support group and someone told me about a doctor in Houston, Texas who was treating cancer and having great success with lymphomas.”
“I met Dr. Burzynski, and I felt like I was in the right place immediately. I just felt so warm and hopeful,” says Siegel. She goes on to say that she did not feel this way about any of the hospitals that she visited. “UCLA, Stanford, USC – I went to all of the great learning and teaching facilities. I had even gone all the way to Dana Farber. So I felt like I knew what was out there and what was being offered.” After learning that Dr. Burzynski’s treatments were non-toxic, Siegel says, “I felt like I’d be a fool not to try this first.” She decided that she could always get the bone marrow transplant if Dr. Burzynski’s treatment failed. “So I started on his treatment against the wishes of my doctor at UCLA. When I told him about Dr. Burzynski, he has some very negative things to say. But I told him that it was my body and that I was going to do what I felt was best. He told me that I had better bring my checkbook because Dr. Burzynski was an entrepreneur and that he had nothing for me. And the truth is that you better have your checkbook at UCLA, Stanford or anywhere you go.”
Siegel admits that the medication was very expensive because Dr. Burzynski manufactured it himself at the time. “When I was being treated, it was about $5000 a month. I had to get a loan on my house. It wasn’t an easy decision because I had three children and certainly didn’t want to leave my family destitute. I didn’t want to leave them at all!” she says. She notes that the treatment was not covered by insurance.
She began Dr. Burzynsky’s Antineoplaston therapy which at the time was available in capsule form or as an infusion that was delivered through a catheter. Siegel was started on the capsules first to see if she would respond favorably. “I stared on the capsules, and I was on them for about a month. But the tumor on my neck was actually getting bigger,” she says. Although Dr. Burzynski explained to her that tumors can actually look bigger when they are breaking down, there was no way to be sure if that was what was happening. Because of that, Siegel chose to have a catheter implanted in her chest so that she could receive infusions of stronger doses of the medication directly into her bloodstream. Siegel notes that the only side effect that she experienced from the treatment was fatigue. “Nobody even knew that I was sick. My hair never fell out, I wasn’t nauseous, I drove all my carpools – I lived a normal life on this treatment. That is why I believe that everyone deserves this treatment if they want it.”
Siegel responded very favorably to the infusions. “I’m telling you, I think that I was on the infusion for less than three months and the tumor on my neck was gone. Gone in three months! One night I got up and my neck was kind of sore, and I looked at it and it was gone,” she remembers.
Because of the type of cancer that Siegel had, the fact that her tumor disappeared did not mean that her cancer was gone. “Because non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is a blood disease – it’s cancer of the lymph nodes – I had it everywhere. You can’t just remove a tumor surgically because the cancer is all through your body.” Nine months after beginning treatment, she was declared to be in remission. “I stayed on the treatment for another three months just to be sure,” she says. “I had these bone marrow tests which were very painful, and I wanted to have two bone marrow tests clear before I went off the treatment, and that is what I did.” Bone marrow tests detect the presence of cancer, and “clear” tests indicate that no cancer was detected. While being treated by Dr. Burzynski, Siegel continued to see her doctor at UCLA who she describes as a very well known lymphoma specialist. When asked what the doctor said when her tumor disappeared, she answers, “He said it was spontaneous remission. He saw my medical records, and he saw my CT scans because I did all my CT scans at UCLA. He saw them go from cancer everywhere, stage IV, to nothing. Every test that I had since starting Dr. Burzynski’s treatment showed a reduction in my tumor.” When asked why he would not acknowledge that Dr. Burzynski’s treatment was responsible for her remission, she says, “I’ve been asked this question a million times, and I believe that what Dr. Burzynski is doing makes what he is doing wrong. He’s an oncologist. He sees very sick people, and he’s giving them chemotherapy that most of the time doesn’t work.”
She goes on to tell of her experiences while waiting to see the doctor at UCLA. “When I would go there, there would be a waiting room filled with cancer patients, and it was never pleasant. But I would start telling people about Dr. Burzynski – there was always an hour wait by the way. Then, all of sudden they would come out and get me and put me in a room inside and let me wait there,” she says. By putting her in a private room, Siegel was no longer able to tell others about Dr. Burzynski. She still remembers the day that she met a nineteen year old girl who had just had a bone marrow transplant and probably weighed only about ninety pounds. “I couldn’t believe it that my doctor didn’t tell her that there was a doctor doing something else. My heart was breaking for this girl,” she says.
Siegel continued to get CT scans after she went into remission, and her 1995 scan detected enlarged lymph nodes. “My oncologist said that he wanted to give me a round of chemo to knock it out. Of course, I said ‘no way’. I called Dr. B. and he said that he would give me some capsules. He also told me that it could be the flu or something and that we all get enlarged lymph nodes here and there. He did not want me to do a biopsy. Conventional doctors will give you biopsies at the drop of a hat, but Dr. B. said that if you do a biopsy you disturb cells. That makes them move around, and you don’t want that. It just makes sense that cancer cells will travel. He suggested that I take the capsules and then get another CT scan, so that’s what I did.”
During that time, Dr. Burzynski was in the middle of an FDA trial. He was being indicted for distributing non-FDA approved drugs across state lines, and Siegel says that she was considered as an unindicted co-conspirator. She was actively involved in the trial and organized Dr. Burzynski’s patients to protest outside of the trial and also helped raise money for his legal defense. The television news program 48 Hours had heard about Siegel and followed her during the trial. “They interviewed my doctor at UCLA and said, ‘She thinks she’s cured, what do you think?’ My doctor said, ‘I think that she’s a spontaneous remission. She’s not cured.’ He made it sound like after I had the CT scan that it (the cancer) would be there,” Siegel remembers. 48 Hours continued to follow her as she had her CT scan and were with her for about a week. “My CT scan was clear,” she says. “It was so great. It made my doctor at UCLA look foolish because he was so sure that it wasn’t going to be clear.” 48 Hours wanted to interview her doctor after the CT scans results were read, but the doctor refused to be interviewed.
Siegel celebrated when the trial resulted in a hung jury and then again when the doctor was cleared of the charges in a second trial. She continues to travel to Houston to see Dr. Burzynski for her annual checkups. For the last twenty years, she has dedicated a great deal of time and effort to educating people about Dr. Burzynski and the work that he is doing. She notes that he has made many advancements and changes to his treatment methods over the years and that he is currently conducting clinical trials of his drug for patients with brain tumors.
Siegel created and maintains a web site, http://burzynskipatientgroup.org that includes patient success stories and treatment information. When asked why she does this, she answers, “I will be grateful to the day I die. There’s not a day that I don’t thank God for Dr. Burzynski. He saved my life. I was told that I was going to die, and he told me from the very beginning that he didn’t know but that he thought that he could help me.”
She acknowledges that there is a lot of negativity directed towards Dr. Burzynski. “It’s all lies,” she says. “He’s a genius.”
Teresa Kennett: Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma – cured – with medical records
To fully utilize this article, click on the blue text to link to the source being discussed…
Teresa Kennett was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma in July, 1984 at St. Mary’s Medical Center in San Francisco. Teresa chose not to undergo any treatments offered to her my her doctors and decided to undergo Antineoplaston therapy in November 1986. She was pronounced in complete remission in May, 1989. She has been healthy and cancer free ever since.
#1 Record of Third-Party Diagnosis:
Twenty-seven years ago, I was diagnosed with stage 4 Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma; the doctors told my family that I would be dead within two years. Instead I lived. The reason I’m alive, strong and healthy today is because I was treated with Antineoplastons by Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski.
Dr. Burzynski had the CURE for my Cancer. This is the story of my diagnosis and recovery.
It was 1984; I was 36 years old. I worked for a non-profit organization training neighborhood people in conflict resolution in San Francisco. I lived with my husband David, a television news cameraman, in a working class neighborhood in the southern part of the City. After ten years of marriage we’d just had our first child, a beautiful little girl we named Zia Marie. Never a conventional person, I was very involved in the arts, alternative healing, organic food and natural childbirth. It was logical for me to consider having our baby away from a hospital, if possible. After careful thought and planning we decided to have our daughter at home with a midwife. My pregnancy was fairly uneventful, and our 6-hour home birth was beautiful and uncomplicated. We were adjusting to life as new parents and enjoying our baby when a post partum check up by our midwife revealed a lump in my abdomen. She thought it might be a hematoma from the birth process, but when it didn’t go away, she sent me to my general practitioner. He sent me for a CT scan. That was the day my life as I’d known it changed. Forever.
The CT scanner at St. Mary’s Hospital is in the basement. I’d gone to the hospital alone, leaving Zia at home with my husband. I was breastfeeding and had expressed enough milk for a couple hours. I’d been told the scan wouldn’t take longer than an hour.
Then I was done with the scan and told to wait in the bank of chairs outside the scan chamber. The minutes ticked by and then an hour. Then another hour. And another. All the other patients had gone home and the waiting room was empty. My breasts were filled and leaking. I kept asking the nurses in the area if they knew anything, but they didn’t. They told me it was important to wait. Finally almost four hours after I’d had my scan, a doctor appeared. He said abruptly,“You have cancer, and it’s all over your body.” I remember that I was shaking so hard my teeth were chattering and I burst out crying. “I have a new baby, I can NOT die!” I said. The doctor walked away. “I’ll go find your GP”, he called over his shoulder. Alone in the empty waiting room I stood sobbing in complete terror and grief. I felt like I was dying on the spot.
The following weeks were a blur. Major abdominal surgery and a bone marrow biopsy revealed the cancer was small cleaved cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, stage 4. The cancer was so widespread, the surgeon decided not to try to remove my affected spleen or any more than two lymph nodes. The oncologist recommended that I stop breastfeeding immediately; he would be giving me an intravenous cocktail of three chemotherapeutic drugs, Cisplatin, Cytoxin, and 5-FU.. My breast milk would be poisonous to my daughter. The drugs would cause hair loss, extreme nausea and vomiting, skin conditions, liver poisoning, etc. They would not cure the cancer; there was no cure for this form of cancer. When my family and I questioned the advisability of taking a toxic treatment that would yield such poor results, my surgeon and oncologist both became very upset and angry. There would be chemo, no questions asked; it would be unconscionable not to take the treatment, and that was that.
As soon as I was able to get around, we headed to Stanford Medical Center for a second opinion. Here they offered the same mix of drugs, but there also was an additional protocol that had recently been added to recommended protocols for this form of Lymphoma. Because the small cleaved cell type could sometimes grow more slowly than other Lymphomas, and because the chemical protocol was so devastating to the body, a patient could choose to have a blue dye injected into the lymph system through the feet and then x-rayed monthly in a “watch and wait” mode until the cancer threatened to shut down a major organ. This was the best offer I’d heard so far, and I immediately opted for “watch and wait”.
But of course, I wasn’t going to be waiting around to eventually be poisoned, even at Stanford! With support from family and friends, I started researching every non-toxic alternative approach to cancer I could find. Over the following 18 months I explored every viable idea I came across and could afford: Macrobiotics, juicing, acupuncture, colonics, homeopathy, peptide shots in Mexico, visualization, meditation, natural lipid therapy, high dose vitamin therapy (ironically, at one point I lost my hair due to vitamin A toxicity), laetrile, and many other things I’ve forgotten by now. Every month I dragged myself reluctantly back to Stanford Cancer Clinic to be x-rayed. The waiting room filled with shell-shocked, skeletal, depressed cancer patients was terrifying. The x-rays showed the cancer was holding steady. It was not going away. But it was not growing either.
In pursuit of a diet that would support my lipid therapy, my mother and I traveled to see a highly recommended nutritional physician in Oregon, Dr. Lynn Anderson. Dr. Anderson regularly put her career in jeopardy treating cancer patients with nutritional therapy. She was also searching for more humane and effective approaches to cancer than chemo and radiation for her patients. When she learned that I’d managed to avoid chemotherapy for almost two years, she urged us to get in touch with a doctor in Texas who was successfully treating cancer with a non-toxic medicine he’d synthesized from the human body. Dr. Anderson thought I would be in an ideal position to benefit from his approach, since my immune system had not been destroyed yet by chemotherapy, and this doctor’s treatment worked with the immune system. I was reluctant to call him; I’d been to so many doctors and practitioners in so many places, but Dr. Anderson insisted. A week later I was on a plane to Houston to meet Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski. My life was about to change again, this time in a most miraculous way!
The first thing I noticed upon entering the waiting room at the Burzynski Clinic, was the atmosphere. Instead of the usual funereal mood of other cancer clinic waiting rooms, the people here seemed relaxed. Children were running around. Animated conversations were taking place. Were these cancer patients? They looked too healthy–and happy. My meeting with Dr. Burzynski was also an optimistic event. Dr. B had read all my records, examined my blood and was ready to start me on the oral form of his medicine: Antineoplastons. He was confident that my body would respond positively to the treatment, that the extensive web of tumors throughout my lymph system could shrink. Every hopeful, I wanted to believe what he said. But I’d been down so many paths that petered out or that led to a dead end, and my body was so tired and so sick, it was hard to imagine a life of health restored. I went back to my little Houston motel room, took my first dose of Antineoplaston capsules and laid down on the bed and prayed. Let it be true, please!
I woke up early the next morning feeling strangely energetic. I got out of bed and found myself suddenly looking forward to my visit to the Burzynski Clinic. There was a buoyancy inside. I even felt hungry for breakfast–something I’d not felt for many months. Dr. Burzynski was not at all surprised to hear about my sudden spurt of energy; this was a common response to Antineoplaston therapy. Dr. Burzynski created Antineoplastons by synthesizing peptides our bodies make naturally. These peptides circulate through the system conveying a chemical message to any cancer cells they find: stop growing! When the cancer cells get this message, they stop reproducing, and naturally die off. The peptides are plentiful in the blood and urine of healthy individuals, but people with cancer and other degenerative diseases have greatly reduced numbers of these peptides, which work in conjunction with our immune systems. Because my treatment was replenishing my supply of peptides, my immune system was being supported. Increased energy was the first “side effect” I had with Antineoplaston treatment!
In the months that followed, I flew back and forth to Houston on a regular basis. Since Dr. Burzynski was not allowed to treat anyone outside the state of Texas, I took a Texas address and lied to the clinic, thereby making myself a federal criminal.
Houston friends of my family helped send me my medicine; sometimes I smuggled it onto the plane instead. I was willing to take the risk of being arrested; slowly my health was actually improving! From the beginning of treatment, my blood work showed notable improvement, although the extensive network of lymphatic tumors remained. I continued to feel more and more energetic and the intense depression and anxiety I’d lived with on a twenty-four hour basis began to lift. As treatment went on, we decided to increase my daily dose of Antineoplastons and switch to intravenous delivery. I had an IV port placed in my chest. Every night I filled an IV bag with liquid Antineoplastons and received an 8 hour drip while I slept. After four months I was experiencing a reduction of my huge, uncomfortable belly and I’d increased my weight from 90 pounds to 100. I’d had only one minor side effect, which was sleepiness after an infusion. But the best news was this: my MRI showed a 25% reduction in the size of my tumors! My family and I were beyond ecstatic.
Because the kind of cancer I had was a slow-growing type, the cancer cells were longer-lived and slow to respond to treatment. My cancer was also very extensive. And yet, little by little the cancer seemed to be naturally dying off as it responded to the messages from the Antineoplastons. Finally the day before my daughter’s fifth birthday the MRI showed the results we had all been praying for for so long: there was no sign of cancer any more in my body! I was well!
When I began treatment with Dr Burzynski, it had been near to impossible to find an oncologist in the Bay Area who would monitor my treatment. None of the doctors I’d seen at St. Mary’s or Stanford was willing, or even interested in my progress.
My husband’s work as a television news camera operator took him on a regular basis to the first AIDS clinic in the United States; sadly AIDS was now a daily part of the evening news, and David had become acquainted with the head of the clinic, Dr. Paul Volberding. Volberding had started off specializing in lymphomas, but had become more and more involved in AIDS research and treatment as the epidemic grew. Because there was no effective treatment for AIDS, practitioners were more open to experimental and non-conventional treatments than doctors who practiced traditional oncology. My husband begged Dr. Volberding to take my case, and Volberding generously agreed, despite his heavy responsibility and international status. During the many months of my treatment with Antineoplastons then, I made regular visits to the AIDS ward at San Francisco General Hospital where Dr. Volberding had his practice. Each time he examined me and looked at my latest scan, he calmly noted that my tumors seemed to be regressing. He was genuinely pleased and happy for us when we triumphantly arrived to share the final “all clear scan” with him. But he never expressed any curiosity about Dr. Burzynski’s treatment or how it could be that a woman who was slated for death was standing before him completely healed. When he later was interviewed by Thomas Elias for the book “The Burzynski Breakthrough”, he stated that my restored health had been due to a “spontaneous remission”.
Teresa Kennett’s medical records are published by written permission of Teresa Kennett.
Jodi Fenton – Anaplastic Astrocytoma Grade III cured – Medical Records
Jodi was diagnosed with an inoperable grade III anaplastic astrocytoma brain tumor on May 15, 2000.
Following her initial diagnosis, her neuroncologists in Los Angeles told her that the standard protocol for someone with her condition is to undergo Temodar®, which is a chemotherapy, followed by a course of radiation. Unfortunately, according to the clinical trials performed that allowed the FDA-approval of Temodar®, the average expected life span of someone with this type of brain cancer using Temodar® is around 13.6 months.
After weighing her options, she declined chemotherapy and radiation treatment and choose antineoplaston treatment instead. One month after starting antineoplaston treatment her cancer was gone. She has been free of cancer ever since.
Very often, when a story like this is shared with most medical professionals who are unfamiliar with antineoplaston treatment, they usually respond in three ways: #1: She was never diagnosed with cancer to begin with. #2 Any treatment she had before starting antineoplaston treatment is likely what actually cured her. #3: Even if it is true, it proves nothing as it’s merely a single anecdotal case.
Note: Jodi’s records are labeled as Jodi “Gold”, which is her maiden name. Jodi was married in 2005 with Dr. Burzynski in attendance. Jodi is now known as Jodi Fenton.
#1 Diagnosis & Recovery – Jodi’s MRI medical records establishing the presence of a mass in the brain. Jodi’s medial records establishing final diagnosis through biopsy. Jodi’s MRI medical records showing her recovery one month after starting treatment. Dr. Burzynski also had a board-certified radiologist from a third-party review and confirm Jodi’s records [PDF of full records and sources for this paragraph].
#2 Prior Treatment – Jodi Fenton has not received any chemotherapy or radiation treatment to date.
#3 FDA-supervised clinical trial data comparingchemotherapy and radiation treatment to antineoplaston treatment in patients with anaplastic astrocytoma. According to FDA-supervised clinical trial data treating anaplastic astrocytoma patients, only 9% of those undergoing chemotherapy and radiation treatment were cancer-free at the end of treatment [PDF page 5]. Clinical trial data treating patients with this condition using Temodar® chemotherapy alone found only 8% of patients were cancer-free after treatment [PDF]. However, these results do not guarantee anyone living a normal healthy life after being subjected to these treatments. The chemotherapy treatment Temodar® offered to Jodi can result in serious debilitating side effects [PDF] or even death [PDF]. Additionally, the concomitant radiation therapy that was offered to Jodi carries the risk of brain necrosis, a condition in which radiation therapy permanently destroys the tissues of the brain, often ending in death one or two years after treatment.
Likewise, according to FDA-supervised clinical trial data treating this type of cancer using only antineoplastons, 25% were cancer-free at the end of treatment, with most of them going on to live normal healthy lives—free of harmful side effects. Therefore, Jodi Fenton’s recovery from this type of cancer after being treated with antineoplastons is not a mere anecdotal case [PDF].
Bristol-Myers Squibb’s Tour Of Hope
One of Jodi’s biggest passions is road bicycling. After Jodi was cured and returned to riding regularly, in 2003 she applied to the Bristol-Myers Squibb Tour of Hope bicycle tour hosted by Lance Armstrong – and was one of 26 people chosen to participate in a cross country bicycle tour to promote awareness for participating in clinical trials and cancer research. When being interviewed for a spot on the team she was never asked where she was treated.
Considering how remarkable Jodi’s story is, Bristol-Myers Squibb placed Jodi infull page ads in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and USA Today to promote the ride. She was interviewed along side Lance Armstrong on CNN.
Jodi was soon contacted by a nationwide publication to tell her story (who’s name will not be revealed). During the initial phone interview with this publication, Jodi told the reporter she was treated with antineoplastons at the Burzynski Clinic. The reporter never called her back. Two weeks later Jodi called the reporter back to follow up, the reporter simply told her “we aren’t going to run the story.” Jodi has inferred that the reason they decided not to run her story is because she was treated at the Burzynski Clinic.
Jodi was indeed cured in a clinical trial involving new cancer research. However, she was cured using antineoplastons—not a treatment that Bristol-Myers Squibb distributes or any treatment that is produced and distributed by any of the major pharmaceutical companies.
Click on the blue text within the article to view the sources used.
Today, the health care industry accounts for over 17% of our GDP. Which means, the more unhealthy our population, the more healthy our economy. One of the ways to maintain this profitable momentum is to manipulate the scientific literature.
Tampering with scientific truth within the peer-reviewed scientific literature is not a new problem in our society, in fact it has become the norm the past few decades. Whether it be ghostwriters writing fake favorable journal articles for medicines that the industry knows doesn’t work or to their hide deadly side effects (remember Vioxx Dodgball?: read Dr. David Graham’s testimony; CNN dodgeball article), the reason for doing this is to preserve the profitable gain within the industry. Even when these institutions are caught in the act and are forced to pay fines and settlements for these actions, this establishment always comes out ahead financially. Tampering with the truth within the scientific literature is a staple ingredient of economics 101. It’s a proven method of increasing profits. Since cancer treatment takes in $90 billion annually, that’s a big piece of a pie they need to preserve.
These tactics serve not only to exaggerate drug effectiveness or cover up dangers of drugs on the market, but can also be used to trick the medical professional or layman researching new competing treatments—such as Antineoplastons—into coming up with a conclusion that may not be the scientific truth.
Former Editor-In-Chief for the New England Journal of Medicine recently stated, “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine. [link to article]
There are two major peer-reviewed articles in medical literature that are often cited by the unsuspecting medical professional as “proof” that there is no evidence that Antineoplaston treatment is an effective treatment against cancer.
Sadly, both of these articles betray the laws of the very scientific method the scientists writing them were taught to respect. The first is covered in the documentary—the National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials published in 1999; and the second is an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association entitled “Antineoplastons: An Unproven Therapy”. published in 1992.
In the usual tactic as many in the past and present have utilized, one of the scientists and paid consultants participating in litigation against Burzynski (Zol Consultants) named Saul Green, PhD wrote an elaborate but sloppy propaganda hit piece in an attempt to discredit Burzynski’s discovery and treatment in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1992. Mr. Green, who is now deceased, is also the co-author of the infamous “Quackwatch” who’s other co-founder Stephen Barrett has endured and lost lawsuits for slander and lying.
Another scientist employed by the United States government at this time who has hired to independently study the toxicity and efficacy of Antineoplastons took it upon himself to write his own rebuttal to what he found as a slew of “misrepresentations”, “scare-tactics”, “half-truths”, “ignoring of clinical data”, and the usual findings while investigating other dishonest attempts at manipulating scientific data.