http://www.***.com/
<excerpt>
Unlike most "alternative medicine" practitioners, Stanislaw R. Burzynski
has published profusely. The sheer volume of his publications impresses
patients, but unless they understand what they are reading, they cannot
judge its validity. To a scientist, Burzynski's literature contains clear
evidence that his data do not support his claims.

more: http://www.***.com/
Burzynski Restricted by Court Agreement

http://www.***.com/
<excerpt>
Summary

"Because of very low response rates in {*filter*} cancer and in non-small cell
lung cancer and in view of the significant toxicity experienced by some
patients, the Agency [Food and Drug Administration] mandated that starting
on Aug. 29, 1997 no additional patients with these tumors should be given
antineoplastons as special exceptions." (Cancer Letter1)

"The so-called five urinary antineoplastons (A-1 to A-5) have not been
shown to be chemically, biologically, or pharmacologically distinct from
each other, and none has been proven to have antineoplastic activity
against experimental cancer." (Green)

Professional Evaluation / Critique

"In a phase II trial, 9 patients with anaplastic astrocytoma or
glioblastoma multiforme recurring after radiation were given increasing
doses of iv antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1. Preclinical studies show that
the phenylacetate component of the antineoplastons may be the active
inhibitor of astrocytic tumors.  Response was only assessable in 6
patients and none of them had tumor regression, with 3 patients requiring
reoperation after AN [antineoplaston] treatment.  The median survival time
for all 9 patients was 5.2 months." (Buckner)

After reviewing these documents, I am unable to say what Dr. Burzynski's
brain tumor data ? or his work ? are about.  What I see is a waste of an
opportunity to help people and advance the field.  That's why you do
clinical investigations: both to help people and to try to make the field
move forward, and what he has done is present such a confusing morass of
data that it's uninterpretable."  (Cancer Letter2)

"Overall, half of the patients who responded to the treatment withdrew
from the study due to patient request, worsening condition, or growth of
tumor, the data summary said.  The document states that last summer, FDA
stopped issuing special exceptions for patients to receive Burzynski's
treatment for {*filter*} cancer and non-small cell lung cancer." (Cancer
Letter1)

The Ontario government sent two Toronto specialists to Burzynski's clinic
- of 20 cases reviewed, no evidence was found that any had benefited from
treatment. Of four patients Burzynski claimed had achieved complete
remissions, three had died of recurrences and the fourth had undergone
surgery for bladder cancer that was believed to be curative. (Dunlop)
(Blackstein)

A 38-year-old woman received antineoplaston treatment for her recurrent
rectal cancer involving the lower pelvis at the Burzynski clinic for
nearly a year. During that period, her tumor progressed. "The patient
succumbed to her disease some 6 months later." (Wanebo)

"Five fractions were produced from human urine by Burzynski, A-1, A-2,
A-3, A-4, and A-5?  Burzynski does not offer an explanation for the basis
on which he chooses any one specific fraction for treatment of a patient,
or why he has never reported using fractions A-1 or A-4 to treat
patients... The so-called five urinary antineoplastons (A-1 to A-5) have
not been shown to be chemically, biologically, or pharmacologically
distinct from each other, and none has been proven to have antineoplastic
activity against experimental cancer." (Green)

Burzynski "offers no explanation of how or where this insoluble substance
[antineoplaston A-10] is made or how it gets from the {*filter*}, through the
kidneys, and into the urine. Being insoluble, A-10 is obviously not
suitable for intravenous administration." (Green)

"The investigators at the Mayo Clinic, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer
Centre and the Clinical Pharmacology Branch of the NCI, found no evidence
of tumor regression in any of the patients.  They concluded that evidence
of beneficial activity of antineoplastons in patients with recurrent
high-grade astrocytoma was insufficient to recommend their use outside of
clinical trials." (D'Epiro)

"Burzynski did not follow the accepted scientific method of testing his
products on animals - he claims that extracts from human urine worked only
in humans and that animal testing would be pointless." (Dunlop)

"It is not clear from Dr. Burzynski's work what response rate he is
actually claiming. Of the 11 BC Cancer Agency (BCCA) patients known to
have been treated with antineoplastons, 9 have died with no evidence of
therapeutic effect. One remains alive and well after having received
treatment at BCCA that we fully expected to be curative. The remaining
patient, who Dr. Burzynski referred to in Vancouver as his "best case",
also received radiation therapy to all known sites of disease. While the
response to radiation was better than expected, such responses have been
seen before and cannot be fairly attributed to antineoplastons." (Silver
1986)/quote

Unfortunately Steve Dunn passed away of meningitis August 19th and has
left incomplete testimonials (about Burzynski's "treatments") on his web
page. http://www.***.com/ ;My current advice is
not to even consider it unless you have information or can gain it that
suggests the treatment can be effective in your specific type of cancer."

And one of the incomplete testimonials has gone to work for Burzynski.
And elsewhere in his own story, he mentions that two of his relatives went
there, but provided no details.

And unfortunately, these testimonials are being repeated on other, web
pages (with discrepancies between one or the other)

Don't believe everything you read on the internet; check with your doctor
first. If the evidence isn't there, think twice before wasting time
(money) and hope.
J