The National Cancer Institute begins to come clean on Antineoplastons:
With the exception of the NCI rigging their own Antineoplaston (ANP) clinical trials in the 1990's, the are finally beginning to tell the truth about Antineoplastons.
Why is this so significant?
Some of the most common arguments in opposition to Antineoplaston research is:
1.
The scientific community doesn't find the medical journals that ANP research is published in to be of a high enough "impact factor".
This is no longer a valid argument, as no American Cancer Institution could have a higher impact factor than The National Cancer Institute Itself. If these manuscripts that are cited within the National Cancer Institute's own public web page are good enough for The National Cancer Institute, then they are now good enough for anyonethe world over.
2.
No one has ever independently reproduced the ANP results that Burzynski has had.
This is no longer a valid argument as Japan has been independently reproducing these results for nearly 30 years, and the NCI is now acknowledging this on their web page.
Overall, two of the three largest arguments that the "Cancer Establishment" has claimed to marginalize Antineoplastons and Burzynski, have just been eliminated.
The NCI also clearly states the "non-toxic" nature of ANP.
We encourage you to read this updated web page for yourselfbut the most telling portion of their own web page, is where they cite one of Burzynski's own peer-reviewed manuscripts as:
"
A phase II study also conducted by the developer and his associates at his clinic reported on 12 patients with recurrent and diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma. Of the ten patients who were evaluable, two achieved complete tumor response, three had partial tumor response, three had stable disease, and two had progressive disease. Patients ranged in age from 4 to 29 years."
A brainstem glioma has never been cured in medical history. The NCI just acknowledged and advertised two of those curesalso citing that 10 of the 12 brainstem glioma patients had a "positive response" to ANP therapy.
The NCI showed the courage to publish the dosage levels and everything!
As for their own clinical trials they conducted in the 1990's where they did not give the patients the proper dosagethey at least had the decency to admit that Burzynski felt their trials were not properly run. Which would make sense to anyone paying attention when you witness the contrast between their own ANP studies and those of Burzynski and the Japanese. Getting the NCI to admit they intentionally rigged a clinical trial to fail will never happenbut at least they are now coming clean in regards to their own trials being questioned and the truth behind this therapy as a whole.
Read the updated NCI page for yourself, by clicking HERE.
If the above link doesn't work, try copying and pasting the link below:
Antineoplastons (PDQ®) - National Cancer Institute
From this day forward, it will be difficult for any honest oncologist, or medical doctor, when presented with this information provided by the National Cancer Institute to be able to provide much of a valid argument claiming "there is no evidence that ANP has ever shown any efficacy against cancer."
(Of course the American Cancer Society has yet to update their page since 2008but we shouldn't expect them to since they are a privately owned and operated entity, not a government sanctioned entity.)
The only final argument to eliminate against ANP is the constant mention of the necessary independently run "randomized clinical trials"where two groups of patients with the exact same diagnosis are randomly selected. One group gets "standard of care" (chemo/rad) and the other group gets "the new experimental therapy" (plus chemo/rad).
We do not want to give too much away before the release of the "Chapter 2" documentarybut an "independently run, randomized clinical trial" has now been completed in a country outside of the USA. The manuscript is being prepared now for publication. The "experimental group" had double the cure rate than the "standard of care alone group". Both groups also received "standard chemotherapy".
2013 will prove to be an interesting year indeed.
![[serious]](/data/avatars/m/160/160873.jpg?1431539545){kind=avatar}
