What are your opinions or thoughts on Burzynski’s treatment vs. FDA approved treatments?

Of course this question has come up many times before and will come up again many times, but note, this question is in regards to the TREATMENT only….

What do you think of conventional cancer therapy (both chemotherapy and radiation)? Not only does conventional therapy attack cancerous cells, but it also destroys normal cells. I know someone who is elderly and has cancer. He was subjected to chemotherapy over the past several years. Thousands upon thousands of dollars (six digit figure) were spent over these several years for him to receive this treatment. Today however, was the weakest I have ever seen him due to the side effects this type of treatment causes. His body is so weak, that he has to stay away from chemotherapy for a while. My question is, does this FDA approved conventional treatment at times do more harm on the body than it does good?

Now, what do you think of antineoplaston treatment administered by the Burzynski Clinic? Note, I understand the legal issues involved between Dr. Burzynski and the FDA. But just focusing on the treatment and the treatment only, do you think targeting cancer causing genes specifically using antineoplastons is a better way to treat cancer? Also, do you know what toll this type of treatment can have on the body and can you compare it to the toll caused by conventional treatment?

Best answer goes to whoever can show positives and negatives (opinions/thoughts) of both treatments and what they think overall is the better way of treating cancer patients.


@Tarkarri, I am happy conventional treatment has worked for you and your loved ones. However, I have not heard of it curing more than half of patients who undergo it. I have watched the documentary and there were patients who testified that his treatment cured them.

Update 2:

Sorry, I misread your post. You said more than half survive due to conventional treatment not cure. But the cure percentage I am sure is much lower.

Update 3:

@Flatpaw, happy for you as well.

I would like to see what people think of the actual treatment and not the Doc.

Update 4:

@April, the six digit figure I was talking about does not refer to chemotherapy alone, That is my mistake, it includes buying wigs, etc... I am not mistaken on that six digit figure though, because I file the paperwork.

Update 5:

@April, and yes everything in medicine or any other science subject should be considered when it is anticipated to make an impact. Even if it is peptides and amino acid derivatives found in urine.

9 Answers

  • JLI
    Lv 7
    7 years ago
    Best Answer

    I do understand that the testimonials in the movie you watched seem convincing. lo_mcg linked to an answer I gave about these testimonials, and here is an expanded version: http://anaximperator.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/burz...

    On top of that, many of the patients the Burzynski supporters claim have been cured by antineoplastons have died: http://www.thetwentyfirstfloor.com/?p=3553

    On the internet there are patients who try to raise funds for antineoplaston treatment of their cancer. Many of them blog about their experiences, so we do know what happens to them. It is very sad reading indeed, and it is not something you will hear from Burzynski proponents. But here they are, and the list keeps growing day by day: http://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com...

    "Antineoplastons" are not Burzynskis discovery. They are metabolic products of a drug named phenylbutyrate. And it isn’t cheap either. Generally, Burzynski's patients pay a $6,000 deposit before beginning treatment. Technically, the drug itself is free because it's only used under Phase II trials, but patients pay for incidentals, including consultations, supplies and classes on how to administer the drug. This runs about $7,500-$9,000 a month — out of pocket.

    At one point he did isolate these metabolic products from urine, but nowadays he has switched to using phenylbutyrate. So his "treatment" is in fact chemotherapy. It is sold under the name "Buphenyl" at a much lower price than Burzynski charges. The drug belongs to a group of "histone deacylator inhibitors". It is this mechanism that is potentially useful as part of treatment. And it is under investigation, but so far it hasn't led to anything useful.

    So what is Burzynski doing?

    Well - He is giving chemotherapy at a very high cost. And he is doing it without data to support that he is on the right track. And the best documented patient testimonials fall apart upon scrutiny.

    It is a demonstrable fact that close to 60 % of all cancers are cured (as in all cancer is gone for never to return again) through conventional treatment. Most of them through surgery, but some of them are treated with additional radio-/chemotherapy. And some cancers are cured by chemotherapy alone.

    It is important to understand that chemotherapy is not just one thing. There are close to 100 different chemotherapies. Some of them are sheer hell while others are quite doable. Chemotherapy is the primary treatment in some but not all kinds of cancer.

    In other types surgery is the primary treatment. If certain characteristics are present in the cancer, that are associated with risk of later detection of spread, chemotherapy can be used to mop up the residual cancer cells that are still in the body. No guarantees can be given, but the evidence shows that the risk decreases.

    Sometimes the cancer has spread to other organs such as the liver and/or the lungs at the time of diagnosis. In that situation, the purpose of chemotherapy is to relieve the symptoms as much as possible. Long term survival is not to be expected, but some patients do live longer and with a higher quality of life than they would have without therapy. Patients who (most likely) will not benefit from chemotherapy are discouraged from having it.

    Source(s): If you are interested I can recommend this series of posts on sciencebasedmedicine.org: 1: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stan... 2: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stan... 3: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/stan...
  • lo_mcg
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    You will have to open your question for voting rather than choose a Best Answer, as nobody will be able to show any genuine positives for Burzynski's antineoplaston treatment.

    What you watched is NOT a documentary, it is an infomercial.

    'I would like to see what people think of the actual treatment and not the Doc.' You can't divorce the two. The horrendously expensive treatment has not been shown to be effective over the many years it has been in clinical trials, and the unscrupulous Burzynski has become obscenely rich convincing desperate people that it will cure them where conventional treatment has failed.

    He has certainly earned his nickname, Buryskidski.

    Antineoplastons - the substances he has isolated from human urine which he claims cure cancer - have not been shown to have any effect on cancer; attempts to replicate his claimed results by the National Cancer Institute, the Japanese National Cancer Institute and Sigma-Tau Pharmaceuticals failed

    So - chemotherapy and radiotherapy are not perfect, far from it; but we know, because they have been rigorously tested and proven in clinical trials, that they save many lives and prolong many, many more.

    Burzynski's treatments have not been thus demonstrated to be effective, ever. And attempts to replicate his claims have been unsuccessful.

    An infomercial with unsubstantiated testimonials is not proof. For a knowledgeable, educated, professional analysis of the film's claims, see the Best Answer to this question:


    And this may be interesting reading for you too:


  • 7 years ago

    I know that I am alive today because of conventional treatments.

    So are 2 of my sisters and a brother.

    I know there are statistics that show more than half those diagnosed with cancer survive due to conventional treatments.

    I also know there has not been a single, independently verified case of someone being cured by Burzynski. He is either unwilling or unable to subject his treatments to review. This is why they have not been approved.

    Add: i too have seen testimonials by "cured patients" however none of them have been prepared to disclose medical records so there is no proof they ever had cancer or that Burzynskis treatments were the reason theyu are cured. If he was as good as they say, why is this information unavailable? Anyone can say anything in a video, I like scientific proof, which is sadly lacking.

  • 7 years ago

    When people cancer there is desperation, sadness, denial and acceptance. There is going to be people that knowing your desperation try to sell a magic, the best treatment and cures for terminal diseases. The truth cancer treatment Resulst are Measure by survival and remission. Remission is common and very few cancers get cured. Lymphoma, skin cancer, testicule, somo localized cancer that get diagnosed early on stage I. there is a lot of CHARACTERs that may offer cures in unconventional way, they are quacks and they have a lucrative intention behind the treatments they offered.If chemotherapy, radiation and surgery does not cure cancers, perhaps nothing else but a miracle.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Anyone who has been taking chemo for years has advanced cancer and the treatment is most likely to extend his life not cure him. Not everyone gets sick and weak as you describe taking chemo.

    We have laws in this country making illegal to state a pill can make you lose 30 pounds, a cream can make wrinkles disappear or a therapy can cure or reduce cancer if there is no proof they can do those things. People who testify their cancer was cured is not proof and neither is a “documentary” made by the person pushing their snake oil.

    There will always be people out there taking advantage of desperate people.

  • april
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    In all honesty, I know you have little to no experience with cancer and various treatments. If you knew anything, you would know that was a mockumentary. Just because it was on the internet doesn't make it real. His useless treatment uses a peptide in urine. I can't believe you were gullible enough to think pee therapy cures cancer.

    Your chemo stats are way off.

  • 7 years ago

    Burzynski's treatment doesn't treat or cure anything.

    It's amazing that the more you change for a scam, the more people will fall for it.

  • 3 years ago


    Source(s): Herpes Treatment http://enle.info/HerpesFreeForever/?pO7E
  • 7 years ago

    Dr. B has a reputation of being a quack. I also had conventional (surgery, chemo, radiation, hormone therapy) (cut, poison, burn) for stage 3 cancer and am completely fine now. It wasn't that bad at all and am thankful for my docs' care.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.