Cancer Research Antineoplaston

Fayard

Have anyone read or watch the DVD about Dr. Burzynski cancer treatment?
I just finished watching it in Netflix.
Of all the cancer research I did before treatment, and continue doing, I never heard of Antineoplaston A10.

Mainly, the type of cancer treated is brain cancer, but apparently it might work with other different types.

Her is the website, in case anyone wants to check it out.
http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/burzynski-research-institute.html
If you Google it, you will find articles about it from the National Cancer Institute, which by the way it was very much involved against Dr. Burzynski along with others including FDA.

If you check it out, please share your insight with me here or email me.

bea-mil

http://burzynskimovie.com/
I’ve heard about this clinic. The treatment is very effective for over a decade. Too bad the government is trying to stop his research. It is all politics. The “cancer “business doesn’t allow choosing our own treatment. We have to follow FDA and medical board regulations. Sooner or later I will need a prescription to get my herbal tea. He is going to be on trial in April this year.

We all should sign a petition to help him out.
His research is a BIG hope to all cancer patients. It is going to be a very difficult for him to win. 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. Do you thing they will allow that too happen. The whole conventional cancer treatment will go down and all pharmaceutical companies will lose all the money. When I’m sick, my life is at stake and it should be my sole decision how I want to be treated not some doctors sitting on the board thinking more about the money they can lose than about the researchers and positive results.

Watch this movie:
http://burzynskimovie.com/

jazzy1

Antineoplaston
Thanks as I've not heard about this type of treatment...no CUT/POISON/BURN...no killing of "healthy" cells. If you view his website, lists many people who've been successfully treated with this program, all types of cancers beside only brain cancer.

As Bea-Mil mentioned he has a long and enduring path to win over his cancer treatments program...trying to go neck-and-neck with the big pharmaceutical co's...not an easy feat!!!

Asked a friend of mine the other day, who's a big researcher and now RN in oncology dept at our local hospital/university, Washington University here in St Louis. Have we found a cure for cancer yet??? Her response, "yes I believe we have, just the big pharmaceutical Co's won't let it happen, as they have way too much to loose." Very, very sad, but true!

If money were no issue with me, I'd definitely consider his cancer treatment protocol.

Hugs,
Jan

RoseyR

jazzy1 said:

Antineoplaston
Thanks as I've not heard about this type of treatment...no CUT/POISON/BURN...no killing of "healthy" cells. If you view his website, lists many people who've been successfully treated with this program, all types of cancers beside only brain cancer.

As Bea-Mil mentioned he has a long and enduring path to win over his cancer treatments program...trying to go neck-and-neck with the big pharmaceutical co's...not an easy feat!!!

Asked a friend of mine the other day, who's a big researcher and now RN in oncology dept at our local hospital/university, Washington University here in St Louis. Have we found a cure for cancer yet??? Her response, "yes I believe we have, just the big pharmaceutical Co's won't let it happen, as they have way too much to loose." Very, very sad, but true!

If money were no issue with me, I'd definitely consider his cancer treatment protocol.

Hugs,
Jan

You're Right, Jan and Bea-Mil!

I agree with you both.

Burzynksi is one of at least a dozen of theoretically groundbreaking doctor-researchers who threaten the current treatment paradigm.

Some other interesting approaches to cancer treatment are documented in Knock-Out, by Suzanne Somers, who I long wrote off as a "Hollywood Bimbo," but upon reading her book (belatedly and skeptically) , I have to concede that she has done some fabulous research into different paradigms for treating cancer, interviewing a dozen prominent alternative oncologists across the nation.

Free to conclude what we may, I urge us to at least read this book, which cites not only Burzynski's work, but the work of Nicholas Gonzalez in Manhattan and others who either proscribe chemo/radiation or use it differently (chronotherapeutically or fractionally) or augmented by assays, supplements and prescribed diets.

That our big wealthy med establishment is so threatened by any challenge to their paradigm that they feel the need to prosecute it is pathetic, particularly when patients are willing to testify how vastly these treatments have helped them. None of these doctors claims to have saved all his patients but can document many who lived far longer than predicted given their documented stage of cancer when they arrived at their clinics. Cynics will call theirs 'anecdotal success' but as survivors of cancers that elicit scant research, anecdotal success is a legitimate source of hope, and we should encourage their work.

My own integrative doctor, degreed at an Ivy League med school, left traditional practice precisely because he was frustrated by its rigidity and limited paradigms.

Appreciatively,
Rosey

jazzy1

RoseyR said:

You're Right, Jan and Bea-Mil!

I agree with you both.

Burzynksi is one of at least a dozen of theoretically groundbreaking doctor-researchers who threaten the current treatment paradigm.

Some other interesting approaches to cancer treatment are documented in Knock-Out, by Suzanne Somers, who I long wrote off as a "Hollywood Bimbo," but upon reading her book (belatedly and skeptically) , I have to concede that she has done some fabulous research into different paradigms for treating cancer, interviewing a dozen prominent alternative oncologists across the nation.

Free to conclude what we may, I urge us to at least read this book, which cites not only Burzynski's work, but the work of Nicholas Gonzalez in Manhattan and others who either proscribe chemo/radiation or use it differently (chronotherapeutically or fractionally) or augmented by assays, supplements and prescribed diets.

That our big wealthy med establishment is so threatened by any challenge to their paradigm that they feel the need to prosecute it is pathetic, particularly when patients are willing to testify how vastly these treatments have helped them. None of these doctors claims to have saved all his patients but can document many who lived far longer than predicted given their documented stage of cancer when they arrived at their clinics. Cynics will call theirs 'anecdotal success' but as survivors of cancers that elicit scant research, anecdotal success is a legitimate source of hope, and we should encourage their work.

My own integrative doctor, degreed at an Ivy League med school, left traditional practice precisely because he was frustrated by its rigidity and limited paradigms.

Appreciatively,
Rosey

Rosey
You mentioned about your doc trained in medical school, disgusted by tradition and jumped over to the integrative side. My chiropractor, having been in practice with 2 other chiro for over 20 years, commented about how their field has changed. He's seeing and reading more and more about his field dabbling in the prescriptions, as that's where the money is going. Sad to hear this, but he's strong-willed, not allowing his practice to change and jumping to other side of fence for the money. In turn, he only works his practice in evenings so he can work a "regular" job, not in his field of training, just to be true to his self. Unfortunately his patient head-count has gone down considerably as most insurance co's won't cover his fees.

I'm as well true to my inner pull, staying with my chiropractor who refuses to dabble in prescription drugs. Sad to see this possible change in his type practice.

Jan

Fayard

bea-mil said:

http://burzynskimovie.com/
I’ve heard about this clinic. The treatment is very effective for over a decade. Too bad the government is trying to stop his research. It is all politics. The “cancer “business doesn’t allow choosing our own treatment. We have to follow FDA and medical board regulations. Sooner or later I will need a prescription to get my herbal tea. He is going to be on trial in April this year.

We all should sign a petition to help him out.
His research is a BIG hope to all cancer patients. It is going to be a very difficult for him to win. 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. Do you thing they will allow that too happen. The whole conventional cancer treatment will go down and all pharmaceutical companies will lose all the money. When I’m sick, my life is at stake and it should be my sole decision how I want to be treated not some doctors sitting on the board thinking more about the money they can lose than about the researchers and positive results.

Watch this movie:
http://burzynskimovie.com/

Bea-mil
I like your idea of signing a petition.
How do we go about?

Gracias!

bea-mil

Fayard said:

Bea-mil
I like your idea of signing a petition.
How do we go about?

Gracias!

Fayard
go to:
http://burzynskimovie.com/

click on:
"Join the Call-to-Action"

scroll down and you will find all possible steps.

Thanks

Fayard

bea-mil said:

Fayard
go to:
http://burzynskimovie.com/

click on:
"Join the Call-to-Action"

scroll down and you will find all possible steps.

Thanks

Gracias!
If anyone is interested in inquiring information about treatment, such cost, please do contact them. I did last Friday, and they answered me today. I wanted to know a little more about it.

pakb56

jazzy1 said:

Rosey
You mentioned about your doc trained in medical school, disgusted by tradition and jumped over to the integrative side. My chiropractor, having been in practice with 2 other chiro for over 20 years, commented about how their field has changed. He's seeing and reading more and more about his field dabbling in the prescriptions, as that's where the money is going. Sad to hear this, but he's strong-willed, not allowing his practice to change and jumping to other side of fence for the money. In turn, he only works his practice in evenings so he can work a "regular" job, not in his field of training, just to be true to his self. Unfortunately his patient head-count has gone down considerably as most insurance co's won't cover his fees.

I'm as well true to my inner pull, staying with my chiropractor who refuses to dabble in prescription drugs. Sad to see this possible change in his type practice.

Jan

Chiropractors
It's a shame some Chiropractors are straying from their traditional role. I know it is true as there are seminars and training for Chiropractors to make more money. Years ago, I was in my trusted chiropractors office and saw a pamphlet laying on his counter. I don't remember all it said but I remember telling him that it bordered or shady. Get them in and get them out.

It talked about unneccesary talking and conversation. Moving patients quickly in and out. How to best bill insurances. I was so disappointed in him as I had been going to him for over 10 years since he first started practicing. He was an excellent chiropractor but I could see subtle differences.

When we moved and I was looking for a new chiropractor I tried several in my area. One lady didn't use a table and only adjusted your neck. I thought she broke it!

Another I went to was a young husband/wife team just starting practice. They don't have treatment rooms! A common area with two tables that others waiting are sitting right next to you while you are getting an adjustment.

I am all for practicing efficiently and such but come on! I finally found a really good chiro that is down to earth and not pressuring.

I am afraid as some of the older chiropractors start leaving practice and the new ones come on board that the integrity of their practices may suffer.

That is my rant on the subject!

Take care, be well!
Pat

carolenk

RoseyR said:

You're Right, Jan and Bea-Mil!

I agree with you both.

Burzynksi is one of at least a dozen of theoretically groundbreaking doctor-researchers who threaten the current treatment paradigm.

Some other interesting approaches to cancer treatment are documented in Knock-Out, by Suzanne Somers, who I long wrote off as a "Hollywood Bimbo," but upon reading her book (belatedly and skeptically) , I have to concede that she has done some fabulous research into different paradigms for treating cancer, interviewing a dozen prominent alternative oncologists across the nation.

Free to conclude what we may, I urge us to at least read this book, which cites not only Burzynski's work, but the work of Nicholas Gonzalez in Manhattan and others who either proscribe chemo/radiation or use it differently (chronotherapeutically or fractionally) or augmented by assays, supplements and prescribed diets.

That our big wealthy med establishment is so threatened by any challenge to their paradigm that they feel the need to prosecute it is pathetic, particularly when patients are willing to testify how vastly these treatments have helped them. None of these doctors claims to have saved all his patients but can document many who lived far longer than predicted given their documented stage of cancer when they arrived at their clinics. Cynics will call theirs 'anecdotal success' but as survivors of cancers that elicit scant research, anecdotal success is a legitimate source of hope, and we should encourage their work.

My own integrative doctor, degreed at an Ivy League med school, left traditional practice precisely because he was frustrated by its rigidity and limited paradigms.

Appreciatively,
Rosey

Dr. Gonzales
If you search on YouTube, you might find Dr. Mercola interviewing Dr. Gonzales. Gonzales talks about his attempt to get his cancer therapy legitimized by going down the clinical trial road. Gonzales had his eyes opened to the greed & corruption that goes along with evidence based medicine. The interview is in several parts and Gonzales also talks about the cancer therapy that uses pancreatic enzymes. The interview is worth listening to.

RoseyR

carolenk said:

Dr. Gonzales
If you search on YouTube, you might find Dr. Mercola interviewing Dr. Gonzales. Gonzales talks about his attempt to get his cancer therapy legitimized by going down the clinical trial road. Gonzales had his eyes opened to the greed & corruption that goes along with evidence based medicine. The interview is in several parts and Gonzales also talks about the cancer therapy that uses pancreatic enzymes. The interview is worth listening to.

Yes, Quite Interesting


I too listened to the interview and what impresses me, in retrospect, are these facets of his theory:

1) The use of daily coffee enemas (that, pooh-pooed now, were advocated by the Merck Manual through the early fifties!_

2) The biochemical analysis of each patient as an individual (not merely re blood type but cancer classification, with those suffering solid tumors put on a different diet than those suffering blood cancers and sarcomas);

3) The advocacy of porcine enzymes as essential to treatment (pigs allegedly having a digestive system far more similar to ours than cows do)

4) The unabashed indebtedness he has to the theories of a mentor who inspired his utterly new approach to treatment

5) his refusal to claim that he can save all patients (they must be able to eat, at least--and the less they have been eroded by chemo and radiation, the better the chance his treatment has to work.

At least, that's what I recall, Carolenk. Which features of his approach most intrigued YOU?

Thanks,
Rosey

carolenk

RoseyR said:

Yes, Quite Interesting


I too listened to the interview and what impresses me, in retrospect, are these facets of his theory:

1) The use of daily coffee enemas (that, pooh-pooed now, were advocated by the Merck Manual through the early fifties!_

2) The biochemical analysis of each patient as an individual (not merely re blood type but cancer classification, with those suffering solid tumors put on a different diet than those suffering blood cancers and sarcomas);

3) The advocacy of porcine enzymes as essential to treatment (pigs allegedly having a digestive system far more similar to ours than cows do)

4) The unabashed indebtedness he has to the theories of a mentor who inspired his utterly new approach to treatment

5) his refusal to claim that he can save all patients (they must be able to eat, at least--and the less they have been eroded by chemo and radiation, the better the chance his treatment has to work.

At least, that's what I recall, Carolenk. Which features of his approach most intrigued YOU?

Thanks,
Rosey

I was astonished by the
I was astonished by the sheer volume of supplements people are willing to swallow in hopes of having more time the planet. Dr. Gonzales, himself, has daily coffee enemas.

I was told that the pancreatic enzyme therapy is not compatible with the high dose ascorbic acid IV therapy.

california_artist

RoseyR said:

Yes, Quite Interesting


I too listened to the interview and what impresses me, in retrospect, are these facets of his theory:

1) The use of daily coffee enemas (that, pooh-pooed now, were advocated by the Merck Manual through the early fifties!_

2) The biochemical analysis of each patient as an individual (not merely re blood type but cancer classification, with those suffering solid tumors put on a different diet than those suffering blood cancers and sarcomas);

3) The advocacy of porcine enzymes as essential to treatment (pigs allegedly having a digestive system far more similar to ours than cows do)

4) The unabashed indebtedness he has to the theories of a mentor who inspired his utterly new approach to treatment

5) his refusal to claim that he can save all patients (they must be able to eat, at least--and the less they have been eroded by chemo and radiation, the better the chance his treatment has to work.

At least, that's what I recall, Carolenk. Which features of his approach most intrigued YOU?

Thanks,
Rosey

Just doing some bringing to the front
nice to read what was written awhile back. Could give those new to the site things to think about.

Hugs

Sisters three

california_artist said:

Just doing some bringing to the front
nice to read what was written awhile back. Could give those new to the site things to think about.

Hugs

I just read your bio California artist
Are you still doing well and continue to not take radiation or chemo?
Did you have a hysterectomy?