Dr. Stanislav Burzynski's cure for cancer has no negative side effects!

he didn't know, isaiah says, "הַיֹּשֵׁב עַל-חוּג הָאָרֶץ, וְיֹשְׁבֶיהָ כַּחֲגָבִים; הַנּוֹטֶה שָׁמַיִם, וַיִּמְתָּחֵם כָּאֹהֶל לָשָׁבֶת"

the hebrew word that is used in isaiah 40:22, חוּג, doesn't at all imply a spherical earth

this word refers to a 'circle instrument', a device used to make a circle, what we call a compass

isaiah is saying that god sits above us and all the directions, the 360º surrounding us

 

While this is neither here nor there, the greeks at around the same time not only knew that the earth was round, but had used that quality to measure the approximate size of the earth a mere 500 years later. What's more, I'd be more impressed by this if the bible didn't also speak of the earth having corners earlier in the same book - corners implying the earth being both flat and non-circular.

Could be. Could it be that Eratosthenes was actually Optimus Prime in disguise, and that Jesus was a time-traveler with advanced technology that made him able to pretend to be dead and perform "miracles" for the sake of creating a religion in his name? Could be. Is there evidence for any of these three statements (your one or my two)? No. Is there any reason to believe any of these three statements? No.

- - - Updated - - -

What, did you find info on the guy?

 

the 'four corners' in the bible is another one of those translation problems

כָּנָף referes to extremities, so it means something like the four directions

the people of the ancient near east, hebrews and israelites, conceived the world as a large, flat, circular disk anchored in water below by pillars or foundations

 

The mountain from where the "four corners" could be viewed, doesn't work on a globe, but does on a flat disc/circle.

 

Maybe because he stood on a mountain or small hill, or even climbed a tree and looked around at the "circle" .

That is not exactly rocket science!

Nope.

 

tate doesn't know what he's talking about, as usual

in the kingdom of judah the prevailing concept of the earth in the 8th-century before christ, was that the earth was a flat circle

 

Wow....that is awesome Dujac......and to think that perhaps the lost tribes of Israel made it all the way over to South America in spite of having such silly ideas about geography.......Wow.......that was a miracle indeed!!!!!????


http://moshiach.com/tribes/ns/6.html

 

Wow!!!!!!!!

Hardly a day goes by as I get a chance to check this forum that I am not reminded of Wayne and Garth as they met up with Alice Cooper......."We're not worthy!!!! WE'RE NOT WORTHY!!!!!!???"

 

what a joke

 

Can you verify any of that? The only result I get for "menorah south america" is exactly that site, and that site provides zero citations. There's nothing there. It's not exactly a find that wouldn't attract attention - you'd think that if it was actually real, someone would have picked up on it. I mean, why do you even trust this article at all? There are no sources. You could just as well cite some random person's blog with absolutely no verification. There is no reason to trust that site. None. Why do you trust it?

No, it's just a person who put in the work to actually understand the language your holy book was originally written in. Because even if the original authors were infallible, the people who translated it pretty obviously weren't.

 

Well.....I know that I sure get chills up and down my spine as I listen to Robbie Robertson's version of Native American YHWH????!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpztvjBhhb4
Native American YHWH


.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1bAX6k5k…

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/dna-scientists-claim-that-cherokees-are-from-the-middle-east
DNA scientists claim that Cherokees are from the Middle East

Barbara Duncan, Director of the Museum of the Cherokee Indian: 2004

.....

....

 

what does that have to do with burzynski being a fraud?

 

The topic diverged off on some remedies from the Jewish Bible. The possibility that part of the lost tribes of REuven and Levi made it to South America would seem to verify that technology during the time of King Solomon was greater than we tend to imagine......By the way.....i personally take the Erik Von Daniken theories rather seriously as well......They are at least to some degree verified by NDE accounts......Only an idiot could study for some time about the pyramids and think that no aspects of technology have been lost during the dark ages when burning libraries was such a fun passtime!!!???


Chapter two, Christian Andreason:

http://www.allaboutchristian.com/spirituality/index.html

 

have you ever seen 'chariots of the gods'?

[video=youtube;OtBfBGCaABU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtBfBGCaABU[/video]

 

Yes....and I read the paperback version back in the '70's. Some of the newer documentaries on the subject are quite well done really! Von Daniken's theories are not stupid or without some pretty convincing back up evidence!!!

 

Interesting............especially considering that Orthodox Jewish historian Yair Davidiy asserts that part of the lost tribes of Israel as well as survivors from Canaan migrated to Greece!!!

http://britam.org/joshua/joshua11.html

 

Trying to get this train wreck back on topic, let's talk about a recent cancer treatment that caught my eye.

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk...ct-hiv-into-a-dying-girl-to-treat-her-cancer/

Sounds crazy, right? Using highly modified HIV to treat white blood cells in order to train them to hunt for cancer. That is some high-tech (*)(*)(*)(*), and seems on its face to be nuts. So... Why do I consider this considerably more rational than Burzynski's treatment, and why does the medical community at large see this as promising while Burzynski is seen as a quack?

Well, for starters, the Doctor in question is a long-standing oncologist with a very good track record of study and publishing (326 published papers in peer-reviewed medical journals, mostly high-standing ones). He didn't come out of nowhere, and he has had decades of actual training directly within the field of cancer study. And for this treatment, he's stayed that course: every piece of information, from "how it works" to "how the lab trials went" to "how the clinical trials have been going" has been published for open scrutiny. And while it hasn't made it past small-scale trials yet, it also doesn't have an anchor of 60 trials around its neck.

What's more, Carl June isn't promising us the moon and back, and he's actually going to legitimate scientific sources. He's not given us any of that Mercola-grade bull(*)(*)(*)(*). He doesn't need propaganda pieces to back up his research, because his research stands on its own. Whether or not the cure actually works will be determined in phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials with a larger segment of the population, and June hasn't tried to transform "promising preliminary results" into "this definitely works" the way Burzynski's supporters have. In short, the differences in methodology and quality could not be more pronounced. This is how actual, science-based medicine works. It's a long, difficult path from "genius idea" to "demonstrably functional life-saving treatment". Burzynski did not walk that path. His treatment has not been shown to work, and has some serious red flags against it. There is just a lot wrong with the idea.

 

they've been thoroughly debunked

 

Perhaps to your satisfaction.......It is a free country you can believe whatever you wish dujac......but I certainly have not seen evidence yet that would cause me to agree with the idea dogmatically that Erik Von Daniken is entirely in error!!!!

Back to the subject of cancer......Author Lloyd Pye is choosing a clinic that allows him to tackle his cancer with a combination of natural and low dose chemotherapy!


https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10151844540982033&id=214837897032

- - - Updated - - -

I personally made a couple of replies to Mr. Pye's note:

http://phkillscancer.com/protocol

http://www.masaru-emoto.net/english/water-crystal.html

 

Wow!!!!!!!!

Successfully treating 9 out of 12 is an astonishing result!!!!!!!

 

you're the one that's in error

not only has his bs been debunked, he's been convicted of embezzlement and tax evasion

 

Yeah, and even then, all it means is "We have strong preliminary results". Nothing more. It still needs a ton of evidence to confirm that it works as expected, that it's safe, and that these positive results were not statistical anomalies. It's still promising, given the strong scientific backing for it and the fact that the lack of evidence in its favor comes less from "nothing positive to present" and more from "not enough time and patients to provide strong statistical evidence", but it's not by any means a proven thing. But here's another interesting contrast. If the follow-up trials for this provide poor results, do you think they'll get published? I reckon they would, because that's how people in this environment do things. They publish positive and negative results, because they care about providing high standards of care. If a treatment doesn't work, it isn't used.

As for your other blog post, well, I don't know what you expect. Congratulations, you found another jackass with no clue about medicine. You still haven't even begun to address my complaints about the last sample-size-of-one-with-no-scientific-rigor blog post, let alone the problems with using body pH to fight cancer altogether.

 

True.......but those are VERY STRONG preliminary results.

You know perfectly well that it is highly unlikely for there to be some other factor in the diet or lifestyle of nine out of twelve people that would turn out to be the more probable cause of what happened there????!!!

Stagnant.......you are thinking and writing like a bureaucrat who has to be careful that she not jeopardize her position or career.........put yourself for at least one moment in the mind of a parent of a child with cancer........How would you word your answer then????????!!!!!! (For the record......yes......you are writing like an exceptionally intelligent and well informed bureaucrat who will almost certainly be promoted and promoted and promoted and promoted.......)!!!!

 

But the sample size is still tiny enough to be unable to account for tons of statistical biases. Which is why we then wait for the results to roll in with more people. You know, the 60 clinical trials that Burzynski has started. And then, we look at the results thereof, and see whether or not the strong preliminary results hold up. In this case, they haven't - at least, that is the only realistic explanation for why Burzynski has refused to publish the results of his phase II clinical trials.

You're right! It is highly unlikely! But in science, we need extremely high certainty. Which is why we wait for the phase II clinical trials.

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*). I'm writing like a scientist or a doctor. This is really basic scientific argumentation. A sample size of 12 is very small, and the study wasn't even intended to determine whether or not Antineoplasteons worked, but rather whether or not they were toxic in the advised doses. This is why we wait for the larger-scale phase II clinical trials.

Why? So that I can look at this through the eyes of a person so desperate, they'll try anything, anything to make things right again? (*)(*)(*)(*) no. That's the reason quacks like Mercola and Burzynski get customers in the first place. If I had a child with cancer, I'd want them to get the best treatment available. And the only way to evaluate that is with a clear head, looking only at the evidence. And the evidence is not kind to Burzynski. I keep saying we should wait for larger-scale phase II clinical trials... But, well, Burzynski doesn't publish his phase II clinical trials. He cancels them, keeps them running indefinitely, and refuses to release any actual results. Why would he do this, when good results would easily lead to a nobel prize in medicine? I can think of one reason, and one reason alone: the results don't support his therapy. There's a reason the surrounding doctors think he's a quack.