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”.

Recent news

Latest Texas Medical Board complaint:

The FDA have lifted restrictions on Burzynski’s clinical trials:

FDA gives controversial doc green light to restart work Liz Szabo, USA Today, 25/06/14

In a complaint filed on 11th December 2013, the Texas Medical Board said Stanislaw Burzynski marketed his experimental cancer therapies online and in news releases in a way that is “false, misleading and violated federal law.”

On 3rd December, the FDA issued two more warning letters to the Burzynski Research Institute and Stanislaw Burzynski. These appeared online on 11th and were subsequently reported in USA Today.

Detailed coverage on Burzynski was published in USA Today on 15th November 2013. This included shocking details of the 2013 FDA investigation as well as interviews with Burzynski and with former patients.

Damning FDA Findings

In 2013, FDA put a partial clinical hold on Burzynski’s clinical trials, meaning antineoplastons were no longer available to new patients.

Details of the FDA’s shocking findings during their inspection in early 2013 were released in November.

Restrictions were lifted in June 2014.

Some of the details of the inspections had already been released and were discussed here:

(Earlier posts relating to the recent FDA inspection are listed below, in an update to the Legal and Ethical Concerns section.)

Following the FDA action and recent bad press, it appears the Burzynski Clinic have adopted a new approach to search engine optimisation. Some rather odd news articles namechecking the clinic have appeared recently. One such article, on aspirin and colorectal cancer, was apparently written by a man whose face is a composite of every actor to have played Batman.

On 15th November (the same day the USA Today report was published), the Burzynski Clinic issued a press release entitled Burzynski Clinic Presents Over Five Years Survival Data From Phase II Trials of ANP for Inoperable Brain Tumors at the Congress. On 22nd November, the Clinic presented two posters at the Society of Neuro-Oncology meeting in San Francisco.

A new book by Dr Paul Offit, Do You Believe in Magic?: The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative Medicine (or Killing Us Softly: The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative Medicine), contains a chapter on Burzynski.

As part of The Amazing Meeting in July 2013, David Gorski and Bob Blaskiewicz both gave talks on Burzynski, which may be viewed here:


The Burzynski Clinic and the British media

BBC Panorama

BBC Panorama’s documentary on Burzynski, Cancer: Hope for Sale aired on 3rd June. If you are in the UK, it may be viewed on BBC iPlayer, here. It may also be viewed here.

Johnsons Solicitors complained to Ofcom on behalf of the Burzynski Clinic. They complained that the clinic was “treated unjustly or  unfairly in the programme as broadcast because a negative impression was given of the clinic which was designed to be detrimental to its reputation”. Ofcom did not uphold the complaint.

They considered that “the broadcaster had taken reasonable care to satisfy itself that the material facts were not presented, omitted or disregarded in a way that portrayed the costs involved in obtaining treatment from the Burzynski Clinic in a way that resulted in unfairness to the clinic.” Having assessed each of the heads of complaint separately, Ofcom also considered the programme as a whole. Having done so, they concluded that the programme as a whole avoided unfair or unjust treatment of the Burzynski

Other UK media coverage

UPDATE 05/03/12: Burzynski in New Zealand

Cancer treatment and conspiracy theories

As Cancer Research UK explain (link below), there is a pervasive and dangerous myth that the ‘cancer industry’ is suppressing pioneering work in a bid to sell more drugs. I say ‘dangerous’ because those espousing this idea often also deny the efficacy of conventional treatment and point to the well known side effects, not only giving vulnerable people false hope but also denying them effective treatment.

The most extreme version of this conspiracy argues that the conventional treatment itself is killing people, rather than the cancer. To give examples, I have linked to a post by Mike Adams, the self proclaimed ‘Health Ranger’, where he expresses this view in no uncertain terms. Notably, Adams has interviewed Dr Burzynski (on InfoWars), where they claimed that the authorities are using ‘criminal activity’ to suppress Burzynski’s pioneering work.

Yet it appears Dr Burzynski does actually treat his patients with chemotherapy drugs – at inflated prices. Evidence of this is to be found on patients’ blogs, including that of Wayne and Lisa Merritt linked below. It also transpires that ‘antineoplastons’ are by-products of the metabolism of sodium phenylbutyrate, as reported here (see section below).

Supporters of Dr Burzynski often argue that the FDA have been part of a conspiracy to suppress him. However, the FDA have continued to approve Burzynski’s clinical trials. They don’t seem to have taken regulatory action against Burzynski since the 2009 warning letter to the Burzynski Research Institute (UPDATE 07/11/12 The FDA issued a warning letter to Dr Burzynski last month). They have even approved a phase III trial. It could even be argued that the FDA are protecting Burzynski.

This conspiracy theory is at the heart of the Cut Poison Burn film which featured Dr Burzynski and patients.

In October 2012, Dr Burzynski is to speak at a conference on “cutting edge and innovative ways of treating cancer”. This ‘Cancer Convention’ is hosted by the Cambridge Institute of Complementary Health and is due to to take place at the National Motorcycle Museum, Birmingham, England. Dr Burzynski will be sharing a platform with several others also promoting dubious unproven cancer treatments. (EDIT 29/04/12 It has been announced that Dr Burzynski no longer plans to attend).

What are antineoplastons? Is there evidence that they work?

(UPDATE 23/01/13 With the exception of the Publications page, there is no longer any mention of ‘antineoplastons’ or ‘ANPs’ on the Burzynski Clinic website. The “What are Antineoplastons?” page has been taken down. Details on the clinical trials have also recently been removed from the site – this includes the claim that a phase III trial was expected to begin in 2012.)

‘Antineoplastons’ are the by-products of the body’s metabolism of the orphan drug sodium phenylbutyrate. David Gorski’s 12th December article discusses this in more detail and includes information on trials that have been carried out on sodium phenylbutyrate and cancer.

Burzynski’s work on antineoplastons has been ongoing for over thirty years with no reliable evidence of efficacy. The scientific community have been unable to review data from Dr Burzynski’s clinical trials because he has not made sufficient information public. He has, however, taken part in a persuasive and misleading ‘movie’, which implies medical efficacy without actually presenting any reliable evidence to back this up.

Eric Merola, who directed the Burzynski Movie, claims to be an independent documentary film maker. In December 2012, as part of his work on a follow up movie, he wrote to the employers of Bob Blaskiewicz, a vocal critic of Burzynski, pointing out Bob’s ‘extra-curricular activities’. This email also made the false assertion that antineoplastons are FDA approved.

The Burzynski clinic imply that antineoplastons and sodium phenylbutyrate are ‘gene targeted’ and in saying this, also imply that this means that side effects are minimal. Literature available from the clinic website claims that Antineoplastons ‘switch on’ tumour suppressor genes and ‘switch off’ oncogenes. This equates to a claim that antineoplastons (or sodium phenylbutyrate) has conscious thought to switch on the genes we like and switch off the ones we don’t. It’s simply not possible.

Data submitted by the Burzynski Clinic to the FDA (reported in the Houston Chronicle) was not favourable. Of 828 patients, Dr Burzynski reported that 36 responded to treatment. Of these 36, 50 % withdrew from study due to patient request, worsening condition or growth of tumour, 44 % were still receiving antineoplastons at the time of the report and one patient discontinued antineoplastons while the tumor was reported to be responding. Eleven of the 36 patients had died, according to the report.

UPDATE 23/02/13 The Houston Chronicle have moved their archives. The same information was reported elsewhere (eg here) and on other sites, linked below.

The Burzynski Patient Group describes antineoplastons as ‘non toxic’. Yet the FDA noted that hypernatraemia, or an excess of sodium in the blood, was noted in 65 % of the 404 patients participating in a study and it that it may have contributed to the deaths of at least seven patients. Hypernatraemia can lead to central nervous system problems, coma and even death.

It has been noted that dexamethasone (a steroid listed in Burzynski’s patient information as being administered alongside antineoplastons) can make it appear as if tumours are shrinking, or indeed vanishing, when they are not.

In a warning letter dated 18/10/12, the FDA asked the Burzynski Clinic to remove material suggesting antineoplastons are safe and/or effective from their website. In early 2013, antineoplastons more or less disappeared from the Burzynski website and it also emerged that the FDA are carrying out an audit. It was reported on a patient blog that Burzynski is no longer able to treat new patients with antineoplastons (see Legal and ethical concerns, below).

UPDATE 31/05/13 Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business, part II

UPDATE 23/07/12: Burzynski’s Publications



The Burzynski Patient Group (which until at least June 2012 still listed Marc Stephens under ‘Marketing and Sponsorship’ here) comprises ‘current and former patients of the Burzynski Clinic, their families, friends, and supporters’. Patients’ names are listed on the site. Presumably the implication is that these people are either current or former patients who are being or have been treated successfully. Not all those listed are still alive.

Patients’ medical records are shown on the site, along with testimonials. Although testimonials aren’t reliable evidence, they are often presented as such by supporters of the clinic. It also strikes me as unethical and distasteful, not only to charge patients vast sums of money to take part in clinical trials, but also to use their medical records in what is effectively promotional material.

Current patients who are the subject of fundraising campaigns (for example, as covered in the newspaper articles linked above) tend to have their own websites which act as a focus for their fundraising and also enable them to discuss their experiences. These are generally full of hope for recovery.

Cari Lynn wrote an honest and insightful article detailing her experience as a patient (and also as someone who had campaigned on behalf of the Burzynski clinic). She wrote

Burzynski’s staff of doctors continued to tell me my increasing pain wasn’t a sign of toxicity but was more “tumor breakdown,” evidence that the high doses were working.

Biopsies from another clinic showed that the cancer was in fact spreading.

Other former patients (and families) who have been unhappy with their experience with the clinic include Lola Quinlan and Robin Reid (who sought damages in court), Wayne and Lisa Merritt (who have received threatening emails from Marc Stephens after writing of their experience), Michele and Edward Price, Andy Cayon and ‘KarlS’ – who wrote of his experience on the Lymphomation. Org ‘Patients Against Lymphoma‘ site. (EDIT 19/05/12 Lola Quinlan died on 17th May.)

In some cases (eg Edward Price, Andy Cayon and Andrea Walsh), the Burzynski clinic have misread or ignored MRI scans and suggested that patients were getting better when in fact they were not.

In 1986, the Houston Chronicle reported that Dr Burzynski made a $300,000 settlement with a Pasadena couple, Stanley and Bernice Zabodyn, whose daughter died of cancer despite “his claimed drug cure produced from human urine”. In 1998, they also reported that Mark and Susan Bedient were seeking unspecified damages for the death of their 10-year-old daughter, Christina, in 1996. This case was settled in 2000 Dr Burzynski by return of a ‘small amount’ of the patient’s treatment expenses.

In November 2012, the daughter of a patient posted a series of YouTube videos relating to the Burzynski Clinic and her father’s treatment. In one of these, she said that her father had been persuaded to refuse chemotherapy elsewhere in favour of treatment at the Burzynski Clinic – for which the family had to fundraise. She also said that the clinic had produced a laboratory report, seen by two members of the patients family, which claimed the patient had shown a reduction in brain cancer when the patient never had brain cancer and had never had an MRI scan.

There are also blog posts linked below looking into the progress of people who had been the subject of public fundraising campaigns in the past. The OTHER Burzynski Patient Group, set up in December 2012, is a site consisting of posts on individual patients and their stories, sourced from information they have posted online.

These don’t make pleasant reading but they are important. Read them.

What the clinic tell prospective patients

In emails to those considering treatment, the Burzynski Clinic have recommended misleading websites such as the Burzynski Patient Group (discussed above). They have also misled people about treatment, claiming that antineoplastons are a targeted gene therapy with few, if any side effects.

Legal and ethical concerns

Several serious concerns have been raised about Dr Burzynski and his companies. These include charging patients hundreds of thousands of dollars to take part in ‘clinical trials’, failing to publish data from the trials, prescribing chemotherapy expensively and unconventionally, misleading patients and attempting to suppress critics by accusing them of conspiring with the authorities.

The Texas Medical Board has instituted proceedings against Stanslaw Burzynski which could lead to the revocation of his medical licence. The hearing was due to take place on April 11th 2012 though has been delayed. Related documents (see “2/9/12”) on the Texas Medical Board website give an interesting and worrying insight into practices at the clinic.

UPDATE 26/11/12 The Texas Medical Board case has been dropped. The reasons for this seem to be that Dr Burzynski was not the treating physician of the patients in question, nor was held responsible for those who were.

It was reported in January 2012 that Lola Quinlan, a former patient, was seeking damages in court for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, deceptive trade and conspiracy. She said that the defendants failed to disclose that her treatment was part of a clinical trial and charged her $500 per pill for drugs she could buy elsewhere for a fraction of that price. Ms Quinlan died on 17th May 2012 with the case still unresolved. This case also involved another former patient, Ms Robin Reid.

UPDATE 26/11/12 The defendants had attempted to get the Lola Quinlan case dismissed shortly after her death but Ms Quinlan’s representatives asked that this motion be denied (18/06/12). Then just over a month later (23/07/12), the case was actually dismissed (on plaintiff’s motion). We can only speculate on the reasons for this. I am aware of no recent news reports on this case. The relevant documents are available from the Harris County District Clerk website.

These recent legal cases are just the latest in a long list…

In 1986 Dr Burzynski made a $300,000 settlement with a Pasadena couple, Stanley and Bernice Zabodyn, whose daughter died after treatment which they believe increased her pain and hastened her death. In 2000, Dr Burzynski returned a ‘small amount’ of treatment expenses to Mark and Susan Bedient, who had been seeking damages for the death of their 10-year-old.

In 1983, following a request from the US FDA, Dr Burzynski was barred by a District judge in Texas from shipping his unapproved ‘antineoplastons’ across state lines. This means that patients had to travel to Texas for treatment, taking their antineoplastons home with them.

In 1985, government officials obtained a warrant which authorised a search for and seizure of records and other property that reflected distribution of antineoplastons outside Texas and other records that would show the antineoplastons had been and were being distributed in interstate commerce. In response, Dr. Burzynski and the Burzynski Research Institute filed a counterclaim seeking damages, injunctive relief, and contempt orders against the government and named FDA employees. Patients alleged that seizure of their medical records was unreasonable, in violation of the fourth and fifth amendments, and infringed their constitutional rights to privacy, to life, and to obtain medical treatment.

In 1986, the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners notified Dr Burzynski that it was concerned about his antineoplaston treatment and about whether his drug was safe and therapeutic to patients. Dr Burzynski and the Board entered into an affidavit agreement under which the Board was supplied with partial medical records of some patients. Two oncologists reviewed these records, covering approximately 60 patients, and were unable to conclude with any certainty that the patients benefitted from the antineoplastons.

In May 1988, the Texas Department of Health informed Dr Burzynski by letter that his use of antineoplastons violated section 18 of the Texas Health & Safety Code. Soon after receiving a copy of the letter, the Board initiated an administrative proceeding

Dr Burzynski was charged by the Board with three types of misconduct in four counts. Counts I and II alleged that Dr. Burzynski’s use of antineoplastons violated section 18 of the Health & Safety Code which also constitutes a violation of section 3.08(4)(A) of the TMPA. Count III charged Dr. Burzynski with violating the false advertising statute in addition to committing false advertising in violation of TMPA sections 3.08(6) and 3.08(4)(A). Count IV charged Dr. Burzynski with collecting a fee for his treatment in violation of federal regulations and TMPA section 3.08(4)(G).

Hearings began on May 24, 1993, and at their conclusion, an administrative law judge issued a Proposal for Decision, finding for Dr Burzynski on Counts I, II and IV and for the Board on Count III in part. The administrative law judge found that it is was legal for Dr Burzynski to administer antineoplastons to his patients in Texas. Despite the Proposal for Decision, the Board issued its own findings of facts and conclusions of law and concluded that it is and always has been illegal for Dr. Burzynski to use his antineoplastons in Texas because TMPA section 5.09 does not allow physicians to prescribe drugs that have not been approved by the FDA.

Upon judicial review, the district court found the Board’s order “in violation of constitutional and statutory provisions, affected by other error of law, and arbitrary and capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion,” reversed it in its entirety, and dismissed the cause.

In 1994, Burzynski was found guilty of fraud for claiming reimbursement from a health insurer for an illegally administered cancer treatment.

In 1998, Burzynski was ordered to cease and desist selling antineoplastons outside of FDA supervised clinical trials.

In 2009, the FDA issued a warning letter to the Burzynski Research Institute, stating that an investigation had determined the Burzynski Institutional Review Board (IRB) “did not adhere to the applicable statutory requirements and FDA regulations governing the protection of human subjects.”

Dr Burzynski requests that donations towards ‘Clinical Trials and Research’ are made to him personally. The following statement appears here:

The Burzynski Clinic accepts monetary dontations toward the continuation of the Clinical Trials and Research. You donate by check or Money Order payable to: S.R.Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D. Please note that donations are not tax deductible.

In a warning letter to Dr Burzynski, dated 18th October 2012, the FDA pointed out that the websites of the Burzynski Clinic and the Burzynski Research Institute (including posted press releases and embedded videos) had been promoting antineoplastons as safe and effective for the purposes for which they are being investigated. Since ANPs are investigational new drugs, the websites were found to be in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
FD&C Act) and FDA implementing regulations. 21 CFR 312.7(a).

UPDATE 07/01/13 It appears that the Burzynski Clinic are currently undergoing an FDA audit and have been stopped from giving antineoplastons to new patients.

UPDATE 31/05/13 On the latest FDA inspection (see also comments by Wayne Dolcefino, below):

Wayne Dolcefino

Political contributions

Dr Stanislaw Burzynski and his wife Barbara Burzynski (who is also Director of the Burzynski Research Institute) have both made interesting political contributions.

According to the Texas Tribune Campaign Finance Data (source: Texas Ethics Committee), between November 2000 and December 2011, Stanislaw Burzynski made 27 donations ranging from $50 to $300 to Texpac (Texas Medical Association Political Action Committee.

In September and October 2010, he also made contributions of $1000 and $5000 to Texas Governor Rick Perry’s campaign.

But the most surprising figure is the $50,000 donated by Barbara Burzynski to the Conservative Republicans of Texas. Unsurprisingly, ‘Conservative Republicans’ believe in free-market solutions to health care and in cutting government spending and regulation.

Incidentally, Conservative Republicans also campaign against abortion – or as they call it, for the ‘sanctity of human life’ (while supporting capital punishment and the right to own guns). They also don’t believe that homosexuality should (in their words) be taught as an ‘acceptable alternative lifestyle’.

Dr Burzynski’s CV

Here it is, all forty-three pages of it – where it transpires he is a hereditary Count and also seems to believe antineoplastons are a suitable treatment for AIDS.

You may also notice that the UK Royal Society of Medicine is listed under ‘Memberships’. This is not as impressive as it first appears.

Following speculation about Dr Burzynski’s PhD, including Peter Bowditch’s failed attempts to track it down (detailed on Ratbags.com), the Clinic’s 29th November press release stated that a copy of the official affidavit would be put up on the Burzynski clinic website. This appeared on 7th December and is linked below.

Burzynski also sells Aminocare Brain Longevity supplement, which is marketed with a view to preventing Alzheimers. The company make several other unsubstantiated health claims about the product:

A Google search for patents in Burzynski’s name also unearths some eye-opening results – such as Toothpaste containing anticancer agents, Methods for treating aids, Methods for treating Parkinson’s disease and PERFORATED TAPE PERFORATOR.

The Streisand Effect

As a result of Marc Stephens and Dozier trying to get three posts deleted, over a hundred new posts appeared in less than six days and the story has now been reported in the press. There is a wide diversity of new Burzynski blogs – with the story being reported from at least three continents, in at least four languages (EDIT 02/12/11 now five) and in the form of prose, poetry and pictures.

As a result, the Burzynski Clinic issued this misleading press release (discussed here, here, here, here and here) regarding ‘recent internet activity between UK bloggers who have provided inaccurate factual information regarding the Clinic and Marc Stephens’.

The posts they tried to ban

The Genomic Repairman took his post down after a ‘cease and desist’ email from Marc Stephens, in which he claimed to be an attorney (according to this comment). The post became public again on 27th November.

David Allen Green – a bold choice of target for Stephens, received a more recent threat. Threatening to sue a prominent lawyer by means of a (presumably) semi-literate and inaccurate rant (judging by the previous efforts) does not seem sensible.

NEW 07/01/13Bob Blaskiewicz published an email his employer received from Eric Merola (director of Burzynski The Movie – Cancer is Serious Business). Merola claimed that Bob’s Disinformation article contained levels of defamation and libel punishable by law for “tortious interference”.

UPDATE 07/12/11 – More than a week after the Burzynski Clinic distanced themselves from Stephens (in the press release dated 29/11/11), Stephens unwisely threatened another lawyer, who also writes a popular blog (Popehat). The problematic post is linked below and the email exchange is here.

UPDATE 14/12/11 – Edward McGuire was accused by Stephens of posting personal information (which he had done, though it was public already) and a death threat (which he had not done).

UPDATE 20/12/11 It also appears that Marc Stephens has been sending threats to a former patient and his wife who have spoken out about their experiences with the Burzynski Clinic.

UPDATE 02/03/12 It appears that Burzynski supporters have succeeded in having a critical post deleted from Yahoo Answers.

Intimidating legal threats

The Burzynski Clinic press release (29/11/11) indicated that bloggers would be contacted by attorneys representing the Clinic. As far as I’m aware, nobody was contacted:

Who is ‘Marc Stephens’?

The Burzynski Clinic press release (29/11/11), stated:

Marc Stephens was recently hired by the Burzynski Clinic as an independent contractor to provide web optimization services and to attempt to stop the dissemination of false and inaccurate information concerning Dr. Burzynski and the Clinic.

We understand that Marc Stephens sent a google map picture of a blogger’s house to the blogger and made personal comments to bloggers. Dr. Burzynski and the Clinic feel that such actions were not appropriate. Dr. Burzynski and the Burzynski Clinic apologize for these comments. Marc Stephens no longer has a professional relationship with the Burzynski Clinic.

He doesn’t come across as the kind of person you would want to represent your company. For example, Beatis describes some unpleasant exchanges on Yahoo Answers, where Stephens writes:

In the end I will be laughing at all of you psychos. Go drink a glass of chemo..on the rocks. You are psycho but at least you have an excuse. Radiation and chemo turned you out..you no longer think with logic.

Prior to this press release, Martin Robbins had been in touch with the Burzynski clinic over the role of Marc Stephens and the legal threats and reported his findings on Google+.

Ken (the author of the Popehat article linked below) has reported Marc Stephens to the Los Angeles District Attorney as he believes that Stephens has fraudulently posed as a lawyer.


This section contains quotes from the hereditary Count himself, as well as an angry Professor and a very jealous man who is begging to be sued:

We were left with the impression that either he knows very little about cancer and the response of different tumors to radiation and hormonal measures or else he thinks that we are very stupid and has tried to hoodwink us

This is a rather long article but well worth reading. Here are some highlights:

He continually drew his own blood, and that of his extremely accommodating family members, to the point where the volume couldn’t keep up with his research needs. So he collected urine samples, at one point taking them from public restrooms, until he figured out a way to synthesize the antineoplastons.

I have the right to do whatever research I want, okay?” he says, followed closely by, “I spent 42 years practicing medicine, doing research, and you are little man for asking such question, okay? Maybe in three years I get Nobel Prize, and you’ll look like a shit, okay, asking me such stupid questions, okay?”

Never, in the civilised world, are people asked to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds to be a guinea pig.

… which said:

“Dr” Stanislaw Burzynski of the Burzynski Clinic (Houston, Texas) is a crook, a conman, a charlatan, a fraud and a quack. This reprehensible little man ruthlessly exploits the desperate relatives of the incurably ill with a series of phoney ‘clinical trials’ whose sole outcome is not to expand the knowledge of mankind, but to separate the poor families from their life savings. “Dr” Burzynski has been making claims for an antineoplaston therapy for the last 35 years yet apparently has not deigned to publish the results of any of his phoney ‘clinical trials’ in any prestigious peer-reviewed medical journal. None of the misleading cancer-treatment claims made by the clinic (on their website and on other social media, such as YouTube) for “Dr” Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy are supported my the tiniest jot of published rigorous clinical evidence, yet he happily promotes these bogus treatments. I have not seen any evidence that the PhD “Dr” Burzynski claims to hold exists anywhere but in his own imagination (though I do not doubt that “Dr” Burzynski holds a legitimate medical qualification). I have not seen any evidence that “Marc Stephens” is a qualified and registered lawyer, nor indeed that he is even a non-fictitious person. If “Dr” Burzynski or his “lawyer” draw my attention to any factual errors on this page, I should be delighted to correct them upon receipt of substantiating evidence.

Here are my contact details – do get those defamation writs in the post before the Christmas rush! (Don’t be put off by by my winter address. This is still a UK-based blog.)

Quoteworthy though it may be, I don’t expect to see that in print any time soon.


What can I do?


Skeptics for the Protection of Cancer Patients are fundraising for St Jude’s Chilren’s hospital in honour of Dr Burzynski’s 70th birthday on January 23rd 2013. They aim to raise at least $30,000 by then (the cost of entering one of Burzynski’s trials) and will then challenge Dr Burzynski to match the total sum.

Here are some other suggestions:


This post sets out how you can help boost the Google ranking of good information on the Burzynski Clinic by writing your own articles, using the right keywords and good links.

Writing about Houston Cancer Quack Dr. Burzynski’s Antineoplastons The Houston Cancer Quack, January 2013

You may also wish to write to regulators or to newspapers who are misleadingly reporting on the Burzynski Clinic. There is detailed information on this in my original What can I do about Burzynski? post.


86 responses to “Burzynski blogs: My Master List

  1. Pingback: The Cambridge Institute of Complementary Health’s misguided calls for ‘reform’ of the Cancer Act 1939 « The Exit Door Leads In….

  2. Pingback: Chris Woollams, Golden Duck nominee | Josephine Jones

  3. Pingback: Psiram » Das Jahr bei EsoWatch

  4. Pingback: Virtual Skeptics 13 (7 Nov 2012) « The Virtual Skeptics

  5. Pingback: Science-Based Medicine » Now that Burzynski has gotten off in 2012, Burzynski The Movie will spawn a sequel in 2013

  6. Pingback: Happy Birthday, Dr. Burzynski! | The Houston Cancer Quack

  7. Pingback: Episode One Hundred And Fifty One – On The Houston Cancer Quack – Interview With David Gorski And Robert Blaskiewicz | Token Skeptic

  8. Pingback: Skeptics for the Protection of Cancer Patients: Battling Burzynski’s Dangerous BS « The Skeptical Teacher

  9. Pingback: Happy Birthday, Dr Burzynski… and goodbye, antineoplastons | Josephine Jones

  10. Pingback: Science-Based Medicine » Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s cancer “success” stories

  11. Pingback: As Josh Duhamel shills for the Burzynski Clinic, Eric Merola prepares to carpet bomb the blogosphere with nonsense – Respectful Insolence

  12. Pingback: Science-Based Medicine » Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski's cancer …

  13. Thanks. I meant to add that at the time and then got sidetracked.

  14. Pingback: Skepchick Events | X-Post: Fight Childhood Cancer and One of Its Biggest Profiteers, Stanislaw Burzynski

  15. Pingback: Esceptica | Posts desde Skepchick: Lucha contra el cáncer y contra uno de sus grandes beneficiarios, Stanislaw Burzynski

  16. Pingback: Burzynski: the false promise of antineoplastons | Josephine Jones

  17. Pingback: SKEPT!CAL blog BBC's Panorama to air Burzynski Documentary - Contact the Skeptics » SKEPT!CAL blog

  18. Pingback: Did Burzynski lie to the BBC? | Josephine Jones

  19. Pingback: Italian government sponsors dubious clinical trial | Josephine Jones

  20. Pingback: Popehat Signal: Vengeful AIDS Denialist Sues Critic In Texas | Popehat

  21. Pingback: Ask for Evidence – Miracle Cures | Purely a figment of your imagination

  22. Pingback: Ask for Evidence on “miracle” cancer cures | Josephine Jones

  23. Pingback: Time is running out for Dr Stanislaw Burzynski | Josephine Jones

  24. Pingback: Burzynski Gene Targeted Therapy Patient Wayne M. | Burzynski's OTHER Gene Therapy Patient Group

  25. Pingback: How maverick cancer treatments are suppressed by the mainstream | Genesis CNC - 80% Lower Receiver - Rifle Building Begins With Genesis

  26. Pingback: Dr. Burzynski and the cult of personality of the "brave maverick cancer doctor" - Respectful Insolence

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s