Re; A Doctor Who Didn't Give In To The *System*

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Jan, Mar 4, 2004.

  1. Jan

    Jan Guest

    Tags:


  2. [email protected] (Jan) wrote:

    >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes the FDA. GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    >
    >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf

    I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is $250,000. A
    couple of years ago it was only $125,000.

    Now, how much does it cost to become a subject in a real clinical trial? Why, it costs nothing.

    --
    Peter Bowditch
    The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
    The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
    and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
    To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
     
  3. Bew

    Bew Guest

    "Peter Bowditch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    >
    > >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes the
    FDA.
    > >GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    > >
    > >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    >
    > I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is $250,000.
    > A couple of years ago it was only $125,000.
    >
    > Now, how much does it cost to become a subject in a real clinical trial? Why, it costs nothing.
    >
    > --
    > Peter Bowditch

    Exactly what its worth '
     
  4. "Bew" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Peter Bowditch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    > >
    > > >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes
    the
    > FDA.
    > > >GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    > > >
    > > >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    > >
    > > I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is
    > > $250,000. A couple of years ago it was only $125,000.
    > >
    > > Now, how much does it cost to become a subject in a real clinical trial? Why, it costs nothing.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Peter Bowditch
    >
    > Exactly what its worth '

    Months ago a friend of mine mentioned that his brother was suffering from multiple myeloma, which is
    often a death sentence and had tried just about everything.

    I have a few contacts in high places, and he was placed in a clinical trial where he is in full
    remission.

    What is that worth, you moron?
     
  5. Bob Brogan

    Bob Brogan Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "Mark Probert-March 5, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
    wrote:

    > "Bew" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > "Peter Bowditch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes
    > the
    > > FDA.
    > > > >GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    > > > >
    > > > >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    > > >
    > > > I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is
    > > > $250,000. A couple of years ago it was only $125,000.
    > > >
    > > > Now, how much does it cost to become a subject in a real clinical trial? Why, it costs
    > > > nothing.
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Peter Bowditch
    > >
    > > Exactly what its worth '
    >
    > Months ago a friend of mine mentioned that his brother was suffering from multiple myeloma, which
    > is often a death sentence and had tried just about everything.
    >
    > I have a few contacts in high places, and he was placed in a clinical trial where he is in full
    > remission.
    >
    > What is that worth, you moron?
    >
    >
    >

    DO you know what a Clinical Trial is? What happens if you're the one getting the Placebo? You don't
    exactly have control over that if it is a *good* clinical trial. Moron....
    --
    Thanks,

    Ham
     
  6. Jan

    Jan Guest

    >Subject: Re: Re; A Doctor Who Didn't Give In To The *System*
    >From: Peter Bowditch [email protected]
    >Date: 3/5/2004 4:44 AM Pacific Standard Time
    >Message-id: <[email protected]>
    >
    >[email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    >
    >>Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes the
    >FDA.
    >>GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    >>
    >>http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    >
    >I believe that the current price

    We know what you believe.

    Organzed brainwashing.

    I repeat:

    >Re; A Doctor Who Didn't Give In To The *System*

    >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes the FDA.
    >>GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!

    From a jurior involved in this *despicable* witch hunt.

    *I was recently a juror on a Federal trial in Houston, Texas. The case was Criminal Number H95-290,
    United States of America, Plaintiff, vs. Stanislaw Burzynski, M.D. and The Burzynski Research
    Institute, Inc., Defendants. The trial ended in a hung jury (6 wanted to convict on all counts of
    the indictment and 6 wanted to acquit on all counts). This letter is to inform you of how upset I am
    at how my time and tax dollars were wasted on this trial.

    In the first place, this trial should never have been tried in a criminal court. In a Court Order
    (Civil Action No. H-83-2069) filed on May 24, 1983, signed by Gabrielle K. McDonald, United States
    District judge, it was stated, "It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED; a) that the
    jurisdiction of this court is retained for the purpose of enforcing or modifying this injunction and
    for the purpose of granting such additional relief that hereafter may appear necessary or
    appropriate." This case, which began on January 6, 1997, involved the FDA and their apparent anger
    at Dr. Burzynski for continuing to make available his unapproved new drug, Antineoplaston, to
    persons living out of the state of Texas. They contend he knew that they lived out of state and
    therefore would be shipping or taking the drug home with them. This, according to the FDA, violated
    the court order mentioned above. However, most everyone agreed, regardless of how they voted, that a
    Federal criminal court was not the appropriate venue for this case.

    A second reason I feel this case should not have gone to trial is because while the trial was going
    on. the FDA had already approved 71 clinical trials, thereby allowing Dr. Burzynski full release to
    ship Antineoplaston to persons living Out Of the State Of Texas. This was not known to the jurors at
    the time. After the trial ended, I gleaned this information and felt I had been involved in
    something that was a ridiculous waste of two months of my life. After all, wasn't this a moot point
    at this time? Surely our government has real 'criminals' to prosecute.

    Thirdly, the prosecution, headed by Mike Clark. Amy Lecocq, and George Tallichet, offered no
    evidence at all of a conspiracy to commit fraud. in fact, after hearing the jury fore person say
    that we were hopelessly deadlocked (this was after 6 days of intense deliberations), the judge
    acquitted Dr. Burzynski on all 34 counts of mail and insurance fraud, which were the most serious of
    the charges, for lack of evidence. For those of us who voted to acquit, this was a notable
    confirmation that the Honorable Judge Sim Lake saw no evidence of the charges, just as we had voted
    not guilty.

    In addition, the prosecution failed to introduce even one witness who could say anything defamatory
    about Dr. Burzynski's character. One would think after four years of preparing for this trial they
    Would have found at least one disgruntled patient, former employee, business associate, or colleague
    who had something negative to say about him.

    Also, since the prosecution had been working on the case for four years, I expected the
    exhibits, witnesses and evidence to be compelling. it was not, and they didn't come close to
    proving their case.

    Since the trial I have learned much about the history of this man and the attempts by the FDA to
    Shut him down. it is my heartfelt belief that a person confronting a life-and-death situation,
    either for himself or for a dependent child, should be allowed to make these tough decisions
    himself. Once the FDA has said that a drug is non toxic and that it will not harm a person (which
    they had), it should be left up to the patient to choose what he or she feels is the best treatment
    available. The FDA should be supporting Dr. Burzynski in his valiant effort to cure and ease the
    suffering of cancer patients. Incredibly promising results have taken place already with the
    remission of brain tumors, non-Hodgkins lymphoma, and breast and prostate cancers. The lives and
    quality of life of cancer patients should be uppermost in the minds of the FDA-not what rules were
    allegedly broken in the past.

    Since the end of the trial, I have done independent research and have learned many disturbing facts
    about the FDA's 'antics' in this case. Some notable incidents are:

    The FDA convened four or five different grand juries before the last one agreed to indict Dr.
    Burzynski. On two separate occasions the FDA confiscated a total of 300,000 documents
    (i.e. patient records, MRI scans, progress charts, etc.) and for Dr. Burzynksi to be able to
    continue to treat his patients, he had to purchase a Xerox machine, install it at the FDA
    office, hire someone to make copies, and to make it even more difficult, he was required to
    call a day in advance to make an appointment for copies to be made. To this day these
    documents have not been returned. Amy Lecocq, the lead prosecutor in this case, violated at
    least six federal laws governing subpoenas of journalists when she subpoenaed a Dr. Richard
    Moss. When he pointed this out to her, she withdrew the subpoena. Patients and their families
    met with the House Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, headed by
    Representative Joe Barton of Texas. After hearing the collective plight of these brave people
    and also hearing from
    if. Burzynski's lawyer, Rick Jaffe, Rep. Barton used the word "vendetta" in describing the actions
    of the FDA over the past 12 years in regards to Dr. Burzynski. I would agree with this
    assessment. I do feel so very fortunate to have been allowed the opportunity to serve on a
    federal jury and would do it all over again. I saw first hand that our system of trial by jury,
    which says that a person is innocent until proven guilty, does work, and for this I will always
    be grateful.

    In closing, I implore you on behalf of all hardworking tax paying citizens of the United States of
    America to put a halt to the nonsense of a retrial by our federal government (namely the FDA) of Dr.
    Burzynski. They have indicated they will retry him and jury selection is set for May 9, 1997. Thank
    you very much for your consideration in this most important matter.*

    Jan
     
  7. Peter Moran

    Peter Moran Guest

    "Bob Brogan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Mark Probert-March 5, 2004" <Mark
    > [email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > "Bew" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > >
    > > > "Peter Bowditch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which
    includes
    > > the
    > > > FDA.
    > > > > >GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    > > > > >
    > > > > >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    > > > >
    > > > > I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is
    > > > > $250,000. A couple of years ago it was only $125,000.
    > > > >
    > > > > Now, how much does it cost to become a subject in a real clinical trial? Why, it costs
    > > > > nothing.
    > > > >
    > > > > --
    > > > > Peter Bowditch
    > > >
    > > > Exactly what its worth '
    > >
    > > Months ago a friend of mine mentioned that his brother was suffering
    from
    > > multiple myeloma, which is often a death sentence and had tried just
    about
    > > everything.
    > >
    > > I have a few contacts in high places, and he was placed in a clinical
    trial
    > > where he is in full remission.
    > >
    > > What is that worth, you moron?
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > DO you know what a Clinical Trial is? What happens if you're the one getting the Placebo? You
    > don't exactly have control over that if it is a *good* clinical trial. Moron....
    > --
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Ham

    Whew! Let me explain something. Medicine decided long ago that it is unethical to use placebos in
    clinical trials involving serious illnesses, if there are useful treatements available.

    If you know how to do a Medline search for "clinical trials of cancer treatment" you will find that
    most of them involve comparing a new treatment to an old treatment. Placebos may. however be used if
    trying to determine the effectiveness of a *symptomatic* treatment in cancer patients such as of
    nausea, as opposed to trreatments intended to treat the cancer itself. I have also seen placebos
    used occasionally in trials of new treatments in advanced cancer patients who have exhausted all
    other treatment methods, but mostly such new treatments are tested out initially by determining
    whether they can produce remissions in a small series of patients with advanced otherwise incurable
    cancer (Phase 11 studies) and these also do not involve placebos.

    Placebos are mainly requoired when testing treatments for conditions which get better by
    themselves or which fluctuate a lot naturally, or where there can be strong psychological
    responses to medical nurture.

    But you will find a lot of untrue statements about placebos on alternative sites.

    Peter Moran.
     
  8. "Bob Brogan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Mark Probert-March 5, 2004" <Mark
    > [email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > "Bew" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > >
    > > > "Peter Bowditch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > > [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which
    includes
    > > the
    > > > FDA.
    > > > > >GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    > > > > >
    > > > > >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    > > > >
    > > > > I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is
    > > > > $250,000. A couple of years ago it was only $125,000.
    > > > >
    > > > > Now, how much does it cost to become a subject in a real clinical trial? Why, it costs
    > > > > nothing.
    > > > >
    > > > > --
    > > > > Peter Bowditch
    > > >
    > > > Exactly what its worth '
    > >
    > > Months ago a friend of mine mentioned that his brother was suffering
    from
    > > multiple myeloma, which is often a death sentence and had tried just
    about
    > > everything.
    > >
    > > I have a few contacts in high places, and he was placed in a clinical
    trial
    > > where he is in full remission.
    > >
    > > What is that worth, you moron?
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > DO you know what a Clinical Trial is? What happens if you're the one getting the Placebo? You
    > don't exactly have control over that if it is a *good* clinical trial. Moron....

    The person was going to die regardless of all other treatment. The clinic trial was his *only* hope
    and designed to see if the medication invovled had any effect. it did. There was no placebo being
    used. In trial slike these it is unethical to use one.

    He is alive.

    So, now, who is the moron? YOU.
     
  9. [email protected] (Jan) wrote:

    >>Subject: Re: Re; A Doctor Who Didn't Give In To The *System* From: Peter Bowditch
    >>[email protected] Date: 3/5/2004 4:44 AM Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
    >><[email protected]>
    >>
    >>[email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    >>
    >>>Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes the
    >>FDA.
    >>>GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    >>>
    >>>http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    >>
    >>I believe that the current price

    You will all note that Jan snipped (without mentioning it) what I had said and then went on to
    pretend that the meaning of the word "believe" in the sentence she snipped is the same as in, say "I
    believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost". It is not, of course, but we have come to expect
    concrete, literal thought from her. That is why she says I lie when I say that Dr Burzynski claims
    to have cured people of cancer because I cannot find an exact quote where he has used the word
    "cure". He says that he has treated 8,000 people. If he has not cured any of them then he is either
    extremely incompetent or is a crook.

    I will restore what Jan snipped so that everyone can see how she changes meaning by snipping.

    I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is $250,000. A
    couple of years ago it was only $125,000.

    >We know what you believe.
    >
    >Organzed brainwashing.

    <snip repetition>

    --
    Peter Bowditch
    The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
    The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
    and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
    To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
     
  10. Rich.

    Rich. Guest

    On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 01:38:49 GMT, Peter Bowditch
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >[email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    >
    >>>Subject: Re: Re; A Doctor Who Didn't Give In To The *System* From: Peter Bowditch
    >>>[email protected] Date: 3/5/2004 4:44 AM Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
    >>><[email protected]>
    >>>
    >>>[email protected] (Jan) wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine which includes the
    >>>FDA.
    >>>>GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    >>>>
    >>>>http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    >>>
    >>>I believe that the current price
    >
    >You will all note that Jan snipped (without mentioning it) what I had said and then went on to
    >pretend that the meaning of the word "believe" in the sentence she snipped is the same as in, say
    >"I believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost". It is not, of course, but we have come to expect
    >concrete, literal thought from her. That is why she says I lie when I say that Dr Burzynski
    >claims to have cured people of cancer because I cannot find an exact quote where he has used the
    >word "cure".

    No this is not why she says that you lie. She says that you lie because she is completely unable to
    logically refute your assertion. It has absolutely nothing to do with her being literal/concrete in
    thinking. She just *appears* to have problems with abstraction of thought but if you look at her
    posts she has used figurative speech, analogies, etc belying this appearance. So she says that you
    lie in order to discredit you. Discrediting you by ANY means possible is her modus operandi since
    she realizes that your logical argument cannot be refuted. If she can somehow discredit you then she
    thinks that she gets the upper hand. And none of the alties have the integrity to call her on this
    egregious behavior. They actually encourage her which tells you all you need to know about them.

    >I will restore what Jan snipped so that everyone can see how she changes meaning by snipping.
    >
    >I believe that the current price to get into a "clinical trial" at Burzynski's place is $250,000. A
    >couple of years ago it was only $125,000.
    >
    >>We know what you believe.
    >>
    >>Organzed brainwashing.
    >
    ><snip repetition>

    I think it very important that we not attribute Jan's behavior to concrete thinking or some other
    cognitive dysfunction. Her behavior is completely due IMO to her lack of integrity, dishonesty, and
    manipulativeness. There is overwhelming evidence for this conclusion.

    Aloha,

    Rich

    -------------------------------------------------
    -------------------------------------------------

    The best defense to logic is ignorance
     
  11. Rich.

    Rich. Guest

    On 06 Mar 2004 03:54:27 GMT, [email protected] (Jan) wrote:

    > poor loser Bowditch>
    >
    >Jan

    Jan says it is ALWAYS wrong to belittle. Indeed!!

    Aloha,

    Rich

    -------------------------------------------------
    -------------------------------------------------

    The best defense to logic is ignorance
     
  12. Jan

    Jan Guest

    >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine
    >which includes the FDA. GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    >
    >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf

    That is the subject, once again, the *gang* diverts.

    Their EGO was brusied and organized medicine was exposed.

    They can't deal with it.

    Sad that they could care less about suffering people.

    Jan
     
  13. "Jan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > >Inspite of the usual treatment form organized medicine
    > >which includes the FDA. GOD BLESS HIM!!!!!
    > >
    > >http://www.cancermed.com/burzynski_brochure.pdf
    >
    > That is the subject, once again, the *gang* diverts.
    >
    > Their EGO was brusied and organized medicine was exposed.
    >
    > They can't deal with it.

    Wrong. YOU cannot deal with the refutation of your pet
    Alties.

    > Sad that they could care less about suffering people.

    Wrong, altie breath.

    "We" care abnout people getting real treatment, not some
    unproven, incredibly expensive one.
     
Loading...