Monthly Archives: November 2011

Burzynski blogs: My Master List

Last updated 17/07/14

Here is a summary of information on #Burzynski – which will hopefully be of use to those daunted by the sheer quantity of links on my Stanislaw, Streisand and Spartacus post.

UPDATE 30/04/13 Many of the links are to the 21st Floor, which is now offline. Most of these can also also be found here, by searching for “Burzynski”.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Emails regarding the Burzynski Clinic not published in The Observer

UPDATE (03/12/11) Stephen Pritchard (The Observer Readers’ editor) has emailed to say

Thank you for your email. I have examined this issue closely and have written a column on it for Sunday. Thank you for taking the trouble to write.

UPDATE (04/12/11) Stephen Pritchard’s column (published today) has upset me and many other bloggers. I intend to address the issues in a new post and new email tomorrow when I have time.
__________________________________________________

As discussed in an earlier post, last Sunday’s Observer published a moving piece written by the uncle of a four-year-old girl with an inoperable brain tumour, promoting a fundraising campaign set up to pay for treatment at the Burzynski Clinic in Texas.

I wrote an email to The Observer’s readers’ editor, describing some of the controversy surrounding the clinic, explaining my concerns about the uncritical nature of the article and suggesting they run an informative and balanced follow-up piece. I have so far had no reply.

Continue reading

Stanislaw, Streisand and Spartacus

In response to a critical Quackometer post regarding the Burzynski Clinic, Andy Lewis received an email from ‘Marc Stephens’, claiming to represent the clinic and asking that he remove the post.

This was of particular interest to me, since I had written a very similar post myself just two days later.

Continue reading

Controversy surrounding Burzynski’s ‘pioneering’ cancer therapy should be reported in newspapers

(EDIT Please refer to my Master List of Burzynski blogs for more up to date information on the Burzynski clinic controversy.)

Last Sunday’s Observer featured a moving article about Billie Bainbridge, a four-year-old girl with an inoperable brain tumour. On the surface, it’s an upsetting but heartwarming tale of hope in the face of adversity, of everyone rallying round to raise money for a potentially life-saving ‘pioneering’ cancer therapy not available in this country.

Tragically, the treatment, at Stanislaw Burzynski’s clinic in Texas, is likely to be a waste of time and money and the optimism seems to be misplaced. Continue reading

Fitalifestyle added to ASA Hall of Shame

Less than two weeks after publishing a fourth adjudication against them, the Advertising Standards Authority have added Errol Denton’s Fitalifestyle (t/a See My Cells and Live Blood Test) to their list of non-compliant online advertisers.

Denton earned his place in this Hall of Shame with a very ill-judged response to this adjudication, which concerned some ludicrous claims about chlorophyll. He duly deleted the claims from this page of the See My Cells site, only for them later to appear here below an ‘OFFICIALLY PROVEN PHOTO TAKEN FROM NASA WEBSITE!!!’ Continue reading

Fitalifestyle continue to make dubious health claims – even after four ASA adjudications

The Advertising Standards Authority have published a fourth adjudication against material promoting Errol Denton’s Fitalifestyle – as the original complainant explains here. This concerns claims made about nutritional microscopy (also known as live blood analysis), in this case appearing on the FAQ page of his See My Cells website.

The previous three related to a Nutritional Microscopy leaflet, laughable claims about chlorophyll and an ill-advised Groupon promotion. Although the ASA ruled that these ads must not appear again in their current form, the latter two remain online here and here.

But that’s not all… Even if Denton had complied with the demands of the four adjudications, his sites would, in my opinion, still blatantly breach the CAP code, since misleading and unsubstantiated statements abound. These include claims and implications of medical efficacy against a wide range of conditions – some of them serious. Continue reading