It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by mnemeth1
Got a link to the original research?
I'm sure that the big boys don't want their profits hurt but at a couple hundred grand for treatment Burzynski seems to be of the same mindset.
edit on 4-8-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Burzynski had fraud and regulations violation charges brought against him for a very good reason - he was selling a medication without any proof it would work, and without any clinical evidence that it did what he claimed it did.
The FDA told him he could not sell antineoplastons until he had clinical evidence, which is why he is now performing clinical trials.
Why is it so hard for you guys to understand that medication manufacturers should have to prove their drug is efficacious before selling it?
If I tried to write a prescription for one of my patients for a drug that was untested, I would have the same charges filed against me as this man did. It has nothing to do with "big pharma" trying to squeeze him out, but rather than he was selling an untested, and potentially dangerous, drug. If big pharma wanted his new therapy banned...don't you think it would be banned?
Burzynski had fraud and regulations violation charges brought against him for a very good reason - he was selling a medication without any proof it would work, and without any clinical evidence that it did what he claimed it did.
The FDA told him he could not sell antineoplastons until he had clinical evidence, which is why he is now performing clinical trials.
Why is it so hard for you guys to understand that medication manufacturers should have to prove their drug is efficacious before selling it?
If big pharma wanted his new therapy banned...don't you think it would be banned?
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Burzynski had fraud and regulations violation charges brought against him for a very good reason - he was selling a medication without any proof it would work, and without any clinical evidence that it did what he claimed it did.
The FDA told him he could not sell antineoplastons until he had clinical evidence, which is why he is now performing clinical trials.
Why is it so hard for you guys to understand that medication manufacturers should have to prove their drug is efficacious before selling it?
If I tried to write a prescription for one of my patients for a drug that was untested, I would have the same charges filed against me as this man did. It has nothing to do with "big pharma" trying to squeeze him out, but rather than he was selling an untested, and potentially dangerous, drug. If big pharma wanted his new therapy banned...don't you think it would be banned?
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Burzynski had fraud and regulations violation charges brought against him for a very good reason - he was selling a medication without any proof it would work, and without any clinical evidence that it did what he claimed it did.
The FDA told him he could not sell antineoplastons until he had clinical evidence, which is why he is now performing clinical trials.
Why is it so hard for you guys to understand that medication manufacturers should have to prove their drug is efficacious before selling it?
If I tried to write a prescription for one of my patients for a drug that was untested, I would have the same charges filed against me as this man did. It has nothing to do with "big pharma" trying to squeeze him out, but rather than he was selling an untested, and potentially dangerous, drug. If big pharma wanted his new therapy banned...don't you think it would be banned?
Originally posted by matito
Burzynski had fraud and regulations violation charges brought against him for a very good reason - he was selling a medication without any proof it would work, and without any clinical evidence that it did what he claimed it did.
False.
The FDA told him he could not sell antineoplastons until he had clinical evidence, which is why he is now performing clinical trials.
False
You obviously do not comprehend the discussion. How can an independent researcher prove a drugs effectiveness if they are not allowed to prove it through the proper means (hint: FDA). And when they eventually are permitted to begin clinical trials the stonewalling only continues.
AND yes it is currently banned for use by the way.. Hmmmm
Originally posted by Shirak
Actually it is on record that he had proof that it worked.
They then proceeded to plagiarize and re-patent the very formula they were prosecution him for,. The shoot themselves in the foot and were caught out when in their very patent they admit it is proven to cure bowel cancer etc.
Originally posted by awareness10
people like this decent Dr, who really can heal
Do you know just how many people have Died or been seriously Injured from their vaccines and Drugs
and now people won't be able to sue them over it very soon in the future
They don't even have enough clinical testing on their own Drugs
they affect the thyroid gland, the liver, kidneys etc
Syntheic drugs do not belong in the human body