Fascinating documentary exposes cancer industry's death agenda: Cut Poison Burn

[baja]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

I think science is one of the great achievements of mankind. We should try it.

Politics and power does not allow it;

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

If you are genuine please watch this and comment;

Burzynski's work has been studied in great detail, and has never proven effective. His drug is just a non-effective form of chemotherapy (you do realize "chemotherapy" is not a specific treatment, right)? It may be non-toxic, but also non-effective. It may yet prove effective, but it has not done so yet.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/...enyl-butyrate/

No amount of emotionally charged testimonials changes that fact. I feel for the guy and his daughter at the beginning, but that doesn't change the facts of the situation.

[baja]

didn't watch all of it did ya

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

didn't watch all of it did ya

No desire to waste 2 hours of my life watching a wookumentary. Are there particular points you would like to bring up and/or deliver in a more readily consumable format?

[Fedaykin]

Baja:

1.) How many patients has Burzynski treated?
2.) How many of those total patients died?
3.) How many of those total patients went in to remission, and for how long?
4.) How many of those total patients were cured of cancer?

EDIT {
5.) How does this compare to a.) no treatment and b.) standard treatment?
}

You can't answer any of those questions, you know why? Burzynski doesn't provide these data.

EDIT: He only makes public a "select" set of data, and even in that data the results are, at best, very poor. To be blunt, even of the cherry picked cases he shares, almost every patient still dies.

[baja]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

No desire to waste 2 hours of my life watching a wookumentary. Are there particular points you would like to bring up and/or deliver in a more readily consumable format?

You asked for proof than deny to review it when presented.

You are an arrogant fool and a waste of my time.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

You asked for proof than deny to review it when presented.

You are an arrogant fool and a waste of my time.

Give me a minute marker of anything you think is "proof".

[Fedaykin]

Clicking through, it's typical conspiracy theory crap mixed with an unhealthy dose of woo. Where's the evidence that his treatment is as advertized. Nothing else matters.

[Fedaykin]

It's funny Baja. In another thread you rail about how "perception" is wrong. To see you double down and put forward this wookumentary as "proof" is hilarious. Skipping around a bit, it's clear this video (like many others I've watched on this and other topics) it relies entirely on manipulating perception rather than conveying evidence.

Appeals to emotion, assuming causation through mere correlation (post hoc ergo propter hoc), red herring distractions from the heart of the matter (the only thing that matters is does the treatment actually work as advertized and SOLD), etc. and so on.

I don't give a flying fig about your conspiracy theories or anecdotal testimonials . All that matters are the facts of the efficacy of the treatment. In other words, show me the data.

[baja]

That's why big pharma with the help of the FDA and the cancer foundation illegally patented his discovery with 12 different patents.

But don't bother to watch the well documented documentary because you "already know"

You're a joke dude.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

That's why big pharma with the help of the FDA and the cancer foundation illegally patented his discovery with 12 different patents.

And I'm sure you have definitive evidence for this, just waiting! Tell me where. What minute marker?

But don't bother to watch the well documented documentary because you "already know"

Once you've seen one wookumentary, you've seen them all. Like I said before. Like I said before, no evidence is conveyed, just various attempts to manipulate perception. That said, I'll gladly address any particular topic which you point out specifically for me to look at.

You're a joke dude.

Only joke is the guy who can't provide simple clinical evidence for a drug that claims to be a "cure" for cancer. It's pretty easy to show it that's true. There would be a huge number of scientifically documented success cases (not just testimonials) and a very large percentage of his patients would be cured or in long term remission.

In fact, it would be almost impossible to HIDE if he'd found a cure to cancer. It'd be perhaps the greatest discovery in medicine since the invention of the modern vaccine or the discovery of penicillin.

Of course, instead of data, your only ammo is manipulating perception with a wookumentary. Truly a joke.

[baja]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

And I'm sure you have definitive evidence for this, just waiting! Tell me where. What minute marker?



Once you've seen one wookumentary, you've seen them all. Like I said before. Like I said before, no evidence is conveyed, just various attempts to manipulate perception. That said, I'll gladly address any particular topic which you point out specifically for me to look at.



Only joke is the guy who can't provide simple clinical evidence for a drug that claims to be a "cure" for cancer. It's pretty easy to show it that's true. There would be a huge number of scientifically documented success cases (not just testimonials) and a very large percentage of his patients would be cured or in long term remission.

In fact, it would be almost impossible to HIDE if he'd found a cure to cancer. It'd be perhaps the greatest discovery in medicine since the invention of the modern vaccine or the discovery of penicillin.

Of course, instead of data, your only ammo is manipulating perception with a wookumentary. Truly a joke.

The proof you are whining for is in the documentary.

Watch it / don't watch it, your choice.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

The proof you are whining for is in the documentary.

Watch it / don't watch it, your choice.

Not even possible in video format. Do you not understand what scientific documentation and clinical trials are?

[baja]

It's called testimony by qualified scientists .

Your proof is a click away choose to remain ignorant if you like.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

It's called testimony by qualified scientists .

Your proof is a click away choose to remain ignorant if you like.

Oooh. Now appeals to (likely false) authority. You're moving up in the fallacy world.

If the treatment worked the way claimed, the data would be there to support it -- trivially. You wouldn't have to rely on appeals to authority, appeals to emotion, etc. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

[baja]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

Oooh. Now appeals to (likely false) authority. You're moving up in the fallacy world.

If the treatment worked the way claimed, the data would be there to support it -- trivially. You wouldn't have to rely on appeals to authority, appeals to emotion, etc. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

You are a cartoon character - watch it, can that be so hard.

It's your chance to shoot me down. Don't miss it kid.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

You are a cartoon character - watch it, can that be so hard.

It's your chance to shoot me down. Don't miss it kid.

You're already riddled with bullet holes bub.

I told you the (100% reasonable) information that I want. Any legit organization would be tripping over themselves to provide it. You refuse and instead hide behind various dishonest attempts to manipulate perception and poorly constructed arguments.

It's pretty sad.

[baja]

The Texas board of medicine admits in court that the protocol works, it's in the film.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

The Texas board of medicine admits in court that the protocol works, it's in the film.

time index?

[baja]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

time index?

Many spots throughout the film. If you can't spare an hour and forty seven minutes than remain ignorant.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

Many spots throughout the film. If you can't spare an hour and forty seven minutes than remain ignorant.

Link? Anything? A date? A case name?

What's the context. Who is on the board? What exactly did they say? Which treatments (he does many, some valid) These questions can't be answered by your video.

[baja]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

Link? Anything? A date? A case name?

What's the context. Who is on the board? What exactly did they say? Which treatments (he does many, some valid) These questions can't be answered by your video.

...and you know that


BY NOT WATCHING IT.

Get lost.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

...and you know that


BY NOT WATCHING IT.

Get lost.

LMAO Can't even give a time index eh or other reference eh? If I asked you for a page number of a citation, would you similarly freak out?

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by baja

The Texas board of medicine admits in court that the protocol works, it's in the film.

... and of course, nothing more than another appeal to authority.

Where's the data?

[baja]

If you stop typing you could'a watched it by now