My wife and I drove a total of 36+ hours to and from Houston over a 3 day period the week after July 4th to have her case reviewed by the doctors at Dr. Burzynski’s clinic.

Additionally, I had to endure – as I’m sure you might have to if you decide to go there – the strident criticisms of family members who are convinced that Dr. Burzynski’s treatments are a scam. Their reasons for believing this to be the case? Their extensive and highly technical review of google search results for the topic ‘Burzynski Scam’, or something like that. I’m sure their intentions are good, but the only way I know of to find out whether something is credible or not is to go see it yourself.

Anyway, we did visit the clinic. We did pay the money you have to pay to see the docs. We did see the docs. We did NOT get to start treatments – but not because I am not convinced that Dr. Burzynski’s Antineoplaston therapies don’t work. I simply couldn’t afford it at the time. Although they’ll submit your expenses to the insurance company, they’re pretty much a pay as you go enterprise – and you will need a lot of cash to get through their protocol.

So, I’m sure you’re asking yourself… what did you see and what do you think about what you saw.

First… I want to go on record saying that I firmly believe that Dr. Burzynski’s treatments work for a significant number of the patients who get treated. I say this based on a gestalt of impressions formed while going through the process of seeing the docs, listening to people talk to each other in the waiting room and in the lobby, the discussion we had with Dr. Burzynski, and the results of my review of numerous journal articles and patents authored by Dr. Burzynski and members of his team.

And the story I overheard from a patient who has been being treated for around a year for extensively metastasized prostate cancer – and who has only one ‘small’ lesion left – is a hard thing to ignore. He was so excited, and definately a patient. He got weighed just before my wife did.

We met with Dr. Burzynski’s son (an extremely personable physician) and an oncologist (Dr Yi) whom I was quite impressed with. He knew my wife’s case in great detail. After we talked, they left and discussed the case with Dr Burzynski. Then they came back into the room to talk about options and opinions. During this discussion they asked to have previous biopsy samples sent to a university for genomic mapping. They also wanted to get a PET scan done and planned to start her on their oral medication to see if it worked for her. (Note: you can’t receive the IV formulations unless the FDA approves your entry into one of Dr. Burzynski’s Clinical Trials.)

OK, yes… money is a central theme going in and coming out of the session with the docs. The office is kind of a money collection machine. But, I’m pragmatic about that. They don’t let you see a doc or get tests at your neighborhood hospital either unless you can produce what are essentially guaranteed funds.

I left frustrated, discouraged and angry that the treatments are not mainstream and easily covered by insurance – but resolved to work on the problem of getting my wife antineoplaston therapy.

The facility was nice. The people were nice and appeared to be competent. The equipment that the blog that my son showed me had complained about was equivalent to the equipment that they use at the hospital I work at. Not fancy, but definately adequate and definately not obsolete.

And then there was Dr. Burzynski…. He has obviously seen a lot of cancer patients come through his doors. It seems to me that he has seen many pass away, and has seen many live. His ice blue eyes never looked away or hid from query. He had the demeanor of a man who believes in what he is doing and has logged significant successes. I believe he is the real deal.

Hope this helps. I’m going to keep trying to figure out a way to pay for his treatments.

Again, as always, you know I’m nuts. Do your research… What I have conveyed above is my story and my impressions. But, after I got home I sent his corporate office an e-mail offering to work for them in Houston (and I HATE humidity) if they needed a pharmacist and covered treatments for employee’s family members.

In previous posts we’ve talked about the belief that many ‘female’ cancers are driven by estrogen and its action on estrogen receptors – and we’ve discussed possible treatment options and theories about how different medicines can be used to reduce this effect.

https://thatcrazypharmacist.com/?p=388

https://thatcrazypharmacist.com/?p=329

I still believe that the points made in those previous posts are valid and important information.

But, I think the information that will be in this post is at least as important.

You see, there’s an ovarian cancer patient who’s the friend of a friend… and her tumors have come back and are extemely aggressive. My friend asked my opinion relative to options they might try in combination with what her oncologist had tried to slow down the tumors’ growth.

So, we talked about some options – and they eventually implemented some of the ideas I’ve posted on this website – and there was no effect.

None, Zip, Nada… – and this bears very heavily on my mind because that woman is now in chemotherapy again, and I am quite concerned about her well being – and feel a need to understand what’s going on in case my family member’s tumors come back in a similar way.

So, I started digging again to see if I could figure out why her tumors seemed to be driven by something despite the fact that this patient was on an aromatase inhibitor.

And – in the middle of the night – I read this passage in a book written by Dr Aurel Lupulsecu:

‘Ovarian cancer is estrogen dependent in premenopausal women and becomes more androgen dependent in post menopausal women.’ (Hormones and vitamins in Cancer Treatment, 1990, RC271.H55L87, Page 33)

Although I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, this statement caused me to pause and think about its implications for a very long time.

As far as I can tell, the author is as informed as anyone in this area, having dedicated his career to studying these effects.

So I then got busy checking to see if the literature supported Dr Lupulescu’s claim.

The bottom line of that search for confirmation is that it appears Dr Lupulescu is probably correct.

Representative journal articles include ‘Expression of human estrogen receptor-alpha and -beta, progesterone receptor, and androgen receptor mRNA in normal and malignant ovarian epithelial cells’, Kin-Mang Lau, Samuel C. Mok, and Shuk-Mei Ho. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol 96, May 1999, pp. 5722-5727. (http://www.pnas.org/content/96/10/5722.full.pdf+html) and ‘Androgen Receptors in Ovarian Tumors: Correlation with Oestrogen and Progesterone Receptors in an Immunohistochemicaland Semiquantitative Image Analysis Study’, M.R. Cardillo, E. Petrangeli, N. Aliotta, L. Salvatori, L. Ravenna, C. Chang, and G. Castagna. J. Exp Clin. Cancer Res. 17, 2, 1998: pp 231-237. (https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/george-whipple-lab/documents/chang-papers/CV113.pdf) There are many more… but some are hard to get copies of, and these two mirror the info presented elsewhere pretty well.

Anyway, based on the articles and works written by Dr Lupulescu and others I’ve read I’ve formulated the following theories that might be helpful in the case of ovarian cancers that don’t appear to respond to the use of aromatase inhibitors –

1. To reduce the levels of androgen hormones that might be driving the tumors’ growth I would try adding finasteride to the woman’s regimen at a dose of 5-10mg per day.

2. If adding finasteride to the regimen doesn’t work I’d add a high dose birth control pill that contains both estrogen and progesterone components.

3. If complete reduction of testosterone levels is desired I’d add ketoconazole to the patient’s regimen.

Your physician will understand what I’m talking about…

The point is that post-menopausal ovarian tumors may need to have their androgen sources opposed, reduced or eliminated if you are going to slow down their growth.

I have no idea whether or not these options might help my friend’s friend. She has already been through an extremely aggressive chemotherapy regimen.. and her tumors came back. – quickly and aggressively. Maybe the chemo created a monster that can’t be killed. I hope not.

Remember, I’m a pharmacist – not a physician – and what I have written above is theoretical, not proven. I’m sure somewhere in the universe a physician or researcher has tried what I’ve proposed. I just haven’t been able to find and read the reports yet.

Anyway, I’m providing information that I think might be useful for you and your physician to consider if the list of options is getting pretty small.

And – as always – don’t change your medication regimens without checking things out with your physician.

But, don’t forget that your physician is only human and it never hurts to try to engage them to think about ideas that the drug companies haven’t dropped on their desks.

We’ve talked about the use of dichloroacetate (DCA) for the treatment of various cancers before.

https://thatcrazypharmacist.com/?p=115

In summary, the data that is available from lab experiments, a small clinical trial conducted by a team from the University of  Alberta, and other small trials strongly indicates that DCA can cause dramatically positive effects when used to treat some cancers.

You can find the results of the clinical trial and information about how the dichloroacetate was dosed in this article – http://dca-information.pbworks.com/f/Metabolic%20Modulation%20of%20Glioblastoma%20with%20Dichloroacetate.pdf.

Anyway, I’ve been reading a Springer Science book titled ‘Mitochondria and Cancer’ over the past week or so, and I thought the information contained in one of the chapters would be of interest to you because it quite clearly defines how the Michelakis team thinks DCA works to cut down cancer loads and progression.

The chapter is titled Reversing the Warburg Effect: Metabolic Modulation as a Novel Cancer Therapy, and it is written by Gopinath Sutendra and Evangelos D. Michelakis.

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with a link to this book – and it is actually quite expensive. However, you might be able to track down a copy of it at a university library somewhere, or the reference librarian at a library near you might be able to get you a pdf copy of this particular chapter.

But, to make the best of the situation I will summarize what the chapter says.

First, it is important to understand that the role inhibition of mitochondrial function plays in the survival of many cancers is known by all.

But, there continues to be a great debate over whether it’s the bottom line cause of cancer progression or the result of the conditions generated by the cancer itself.

In this chapter the authors present the proposal that the mitochondrias’ function has been disabled as the result of an environment that prevented proper function (e.g. a lack of oxygen), and that – for some reason – once the cells’ metabolism has been altered to compensate for the mitochondria’s inactivation, the cells resist turning them back on once the unfavorable conditions have been remedied.

Having the mitochondria disabled causes the membrane surrounding the mitochondria to become more negatively charged than they normally would be, and this prevents the exit of several substances from the mitochondria that are necessary for the induction of apoptosis (programmed cell death) .

By inactivating an enzyme that blocks the flow of a key substance that is required by the mitochondria, DCA works to reestablish the flow – thus enabling the mitochondria to resume proper function.

Apparently, using DCA to unlock the strangle hold that the cancer cell’s metabolism puts on the mitochondria allows the mitochondrial membrane to return to its normal voltage level – with a subsequent release of the substances that normalize the cell’s functions and signal the cell to progress to apoptosis.

The authors note that this phenomenom does not occur in all cancer types, but does appear to be present in most. A list of the types that may not exhibit it is also listed in the article.

As always, I’m a Pharmacist. Talk to your physician before trying any new medication or supplement… and/or changing your medication regimen.

I have struggled with what to say in this post for several weeks.

I strive to provide information that I think people – especially cancer patients and those who love them – should know about… and to avoid posting info that can’t be backed up with cold, hard data.

But, sometimes the topic is extremely controversial…

This is the case for Dr Burzynski and his antineoplaston based cancer treatments.

To say that extremely large sums of money have been spent to try to keep his treatments away from the public would be an understatement.

I will not speculate as to why this has been the case, or detail who it seems has been spending the money and energy to suppress his therapies.

But, if you’re interested keep reading and check out the links I’ve posted within this post.

I will go on record to say that as far as I can tell – and I have checked the info pretty thoroughly because I was reviewing it as an option for a family member  who has cancer – Dr Burzynski’s therapy is real, works for many patients, is solidly based on scientific evidence and should be considered as an option for any cancer patient.

Especially those who have reached the point where the doctors have told them they can do no more – or by those who anticipate that’s where they’re going to end up. It seems to make sense that the sooner the treatments start – and the less damaged the patients are from other treatment efforts – the more likely they are to work.

But, it is expensive… and it is my understanding that most insurance companies won’t pay for it.

I would like to point out, however, that the cost – when scaled to the need to maintain the research and treatment operations that he has built and to fight off the attacks that have been made against him and his therapies – is probably low compared to what would be charged by the traditional pharmaceutical companies.

Anyway, in summary:

While performing research Dr Burzynski noted that specific peptide substances were missing from the urine of many cancer patients. He researched the possibility that replacing those peptides would work as a treatment for cancer patients. It seems that his beliefs were true, and many cancer patients seem to have definately gained serious benefits from undergoing his treatments. This accomplishment is all the more notable when one considers that only the most hopeless cases have been previously allowed access to Dr Burzynski’s treatments. Powerful organizations have repeatedly tried to have his therapies suppressed, but the evidence in support of the effectiveness of these therapies continues to thwart their efforts. It is my understanding that he is the owner of the patents for the use of these ‘antineoplaston’ peptides, and he maintains a research and treatment center in the Houston, Texas area.

You can find out more information about the Burzynski therapies by taking a look at this website http://www.burzynskimovie.com/, reading Thomas Elias’ book titled ‘The Burzynski Breakthrough’, or by viewing the video located at this web address http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/162978-1.

You can also watch a Question and Answer session with Dr Burzynski and others that was held at the Newport Beach Film Festival at this address http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8m1A7ISEFE.

I guarantee that watching these videos will change your world perspective.

You can buy a copy of the Elias book on Amazon, and other places. You can buy a copy of the movie at Amazon.com, or view it as an Amazon Instant Video download at http://www.amazon.com/Burzynski-Movie-Cancer-Serious-Business/dp/B004LKF01O/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1301218912&sr=8-2.

I think you should visit the Burzynski Movie website and check it out a bit, buy a copy of Elias’ book and read it, watch the video from the CSPAN site, AND watch the full movie – either by buying it or downloading it onto your computer from Amazon.com.

And don’t forget to watch the Newport Beach Film Festival interview.

You should also take a look at Dr Burzynski’s websites –  http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/ and http://www.burzynskiresearch.com/ – and contact them asking for the infomation they provide to potential patients relative to the treatments’ availability and trial results.

Then – after gathering as much info as you can – you should decide for yourself whether you believe this is a therapy that might work for you or your loved one.

I can’t afford it for my family member, at least not at this time. But, it is on my list of options.

You will have to decide for yourself.

As always, I have no affiliation with Dr Burzynski (or any other persons affiliated with the movie or the book) – and make no money if you go there or buy, read or view any of the materials you can get to using the links above.

The information I’ve provided is for your consideration, not a recommendation of pursuit of any specific therapeutic path.

Again, I’m a Pharmacist – NOT a physician. I am only providing this information to ensure you have access to new ideas that you can talk over with your physician. Only you and your physician can determine if this is a path you should follow.