The Cancer HOAX Amazing Testimony

Video Transcript:

My name is Sergeant Rick Schiff. I'm an 11-year veteran of the San Francisco Police Department. I hold the department's highest medal of honor for bravery. That used to mean a lot more to me than it does now. What I'd like to talk to you about today is my now seven-year-old daughter. This is an identical twin. Her sister is now dead. Her sister, when she was four years old, Kristen, developed a highly malignant brain tumor that had spread throughout her spine and her brain. The doctors told us that we had really two options. Take her home, let her die, or bring her in for massive dosages of chemo and radiation simultaneously. In either event, she was going to die. There were quite certain of that and very quickly. Believing her only chance to be the standard route, we gave her the chemo and radiation. It burned her skull so bad she had second-degree burns and her hair never came back. To change her diapers, we had to wear rubber gloves because her urine was so toxic and it burned her. At the end of six months, miraculously, she survived the standard treatment, although there was a high expectation she wouldn't. She still had cancer. We were told, sorry, we've done everything we can. Now she's going to die probably within a couple of months. My wife and I choosing not to accept that started reading. The first book I picked up, the third chapter discussed Dr. Brzynski. As you may guess, I have some expertise in fraud. In fact, I'm quite certain there are enough attorneys in the room that could be boarddeered as an expert in fraud. And I conducted my own investigation. I have no doubt the man is not a fraud. I have no doubt that he does what he does at an earnest belief that his medicine works. And I urinate a position to judge for yourselves whether it works or not, but it's well established by the FDA that it's non-toxic. 18 months later, we took my daughter off the antionial plaston. She had not died. She had no signs of tumor. She remained free for 18 months of cancer. Within a month, the cancer was widespread in her brain. We put her back on Brzynski's, by the way, at the objections of our doctors for some reason felt that it had failed her. We put her back on within nine weeks. The tumor was completely gone. She died last July of neurological necrosis. Her brain fell apart from the radiation. The autopsy showed that she was completely cancer-free. Out of 52 cases of that disease ever, no one died cancer-free, just Chrissy. So she didn't die of a terminal illness. She died of my inability to care for her properly, and she died from bad advice. She died because there's a government institution that disseminates false information and is not looking out for the welfare of the people. You know, ladies and gentlemen, when I sworn oath 11 years ago, and I think most of us in this room swore at one time or another to uphold the Constitution, it says life right in the beginning. I first heard of Dr. Brzynski back in the late 1980s when he was in a battle with the Texas Medical Board and the FDA regarding his innovative approach to cancer. I wasn't surprised by that. Anyone who's innovative in medicine creates ways in the medical system. However, in his case, I was continually surprised that they've been put him out of business. I kept hearing about him. So in the mid-1990s, I said, Dr. Brzynski, I want to come down to visit your clinic and find out what you're doing. It's very new to me. When I arrived, he had seven charts ready for me to review, that had been reviewed by the National Cancer Institute, who also made a site visit the year before. The National Cancer Institute reported that these seven patients were either in complete remission or there was substantial improvement. I was astounded. Dr. Brzynski had MRIs and brain tumors known to be almost university fatal and it simply disappeared. It was obvious to me that Dr. Brzynski had made the most important discovery in cancer treatment ever. It's what we have been looking for. A Polish native named Stanzlaw Brzynski attended Lublin Medical University where he graduated first in his class at age 24 and then received his PhD in biochemistry the following year. While undergoing his research to acquire his PhD, Dr. Brzynski made a profound discovery. He found a strain of peptides in human blood and urine that had never before been recorded in biomedical research. As his curiosity in these peptides evolved, he made another profound observation. People who were inflicted with cancer seemed to lack these newly discovered peptides in both their blood and urine. While those who were healthy and free of cancer appeared to have an abundance of these peptides. Dr. Brzynski theorized that if he could somehow provide a way to chemically extract these peptides from the blood and urine of healthy donors and administer these peptides to those with cancer, perhaps it could be useful in treating the disease. Now discovering something in the urine at that time, the head not been discovered before, is like finding a whole bunch of islands 10 miles off the coast of Miami. It came as a big surprise. All of a sudden he was besmirched as the urine doctor. We've had yet been extracting things from the urine as an established medical modality. Tens of millions of women have been swallowing extracts of horse urine, primord for decades. But all of a sudden it was abhorrent to our sensitivities. Well, Dr. Brzynski now synthesizes all of the antinear plastics. Dr. Brzynski's manufacturing facility in Stafford, Texas, where his antinear plastics are now synthesized, is a multi-million dollar 46,000 square foot facility which staffs five engineers, four chemists, three pharmacists, four medical doctors, and four researchers. When we started in 1970s, now is forming completely new upload to cancer treatment, which is called gene target therapy. Antinear plastics are medicines which work on the genes which are causing cancer. And now there's 25 medications which belong to the family of gene target therapy which are approved by the United States. The problem with these medicines is that they don't cover as many genes as antinear plastics. Many of them simply work on single genes and this is not enough to have a long term responses. Single medicines are not going to do it. It's not enough. Anti-plastions work on close to 100 different genes. Our bodies contain two categories of genes that allow cancer to flourish, oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes. When someone has cancer, they have a higher level of oncogenes switched on with a higher level of tumor suppressor genes switched off. The goal is to tell the body to both switch back on the tumor suppressor genes and turn off as many oncogenes as possible. Statistically, every day one out of 10,000 cells in our body may develop in a wrong way and some of these cells may become cancer cells. But why if we don't develop cancer? All of us is because we have protective system, we have anti-near plastics, we will immediately force these malignant cells to die by working on the genes, by turning on genes which fight cancer, turning off the genes which promote cancer. As long as we have proper amount of anti-inflammatory systems, we should not develop cancer if we are deficient, then we can develop cancer. So this means that I put together a theory of the second important quote immune system in our body. Today, Dr. Brzynski is permitted by the FDA to treat cancer patients using anti-nearplastions in FDA approved clinical trials. Since brain cancer is one of the most difficult types of cancer to treat, he places a heavy focus on brain cancer and his clinical trials. On May 15th of 2000, I was diagnosed with an inoperable stage 3 anoplasic astrocytoma brain tumor. Following my diagnosis, I was told that I had 6 to 18 months to live. So I met with oncologists here in Los Angeles and San Francisco and they were telling me at that time the oncologists told me that the protocol for me would be to do temodarb, which is a chemotherapy followed by a course of radiation. I asked them what that treatment would get me and they said maybe five years, maybe five years of life. So of course I asked what would happen after five years if I get to that five years and they said well we'll see what's available at that time, meaning I would perpetually be on a course of treatment. Didn't sound good enough for me. Also at that time I'd heard about Dr. Brzynski in Houston and I found out about Dr. Brzynski through a friend of mine, but you know I met with a prominent neurosurgeon here who wrote off Dr. Brzynski. And he told me point blank that anti-nearplastions don't work. The Dr. Brzynski's treatment really sounded right to me. So I started on his treatment on June 6th of 2000. In December of 2000 all that was left of the tumor was scar tissue and again this was confirmed through an MRI. In October of 2001 I stopped anti-nearplastions therapy altogether. I've had annual MRIs since that time. So over the course of the last eight years, annual MRIs have confirmed all that's after the tumor is scar tissue and I have been off treatment for that entire time. So Dr. Brzynski cured me of a brain tumor. If we review Jody Fenton's medical records who was known at this time as Jody Gold before she was married in 2005, it shows she underwent an MRI at St. John's Medical Center in Los Angeles on May 11th of 2000 where they found a two-centimeter mass which they suspected was cancer. The pathology department at St. John's performed a biopsy four days later and confirmed that she did indeed have a malignant brain tumor. Ordinarily the FDA requires that anyone who wishes to be a part of Dr. Brzynski's trials must first have already undergone chemotherapy and radiation and failed. However, since Jody's tumor was so aggressive and her prognosis severely grim, she managed to get special exception status to be placed into this trial without undergoing any other prior treatment whatsoever. An MRI on June 1st of 2000 revealed the size of the enhancing portion of Jody's tumor, which was the part of her tumor that was the most aggressively growing. On June 6th, she started Antoneal Plaston Treatment and by July 3rd, only a month after starting treatment, the enhancing portion of her tumor was gone. Her tumor remained non-existent up until September of the following year when she stopped her Antoneal Plaston Treatment altogether. It's one thing to be shown a single anecdotal case with this type of brain tumor, and it's another to simply compare clinical trial data of inoperable, anoplasmic astrocytoma patients treated with toxic radiation and chemotherapy, versus clinical trial data using only Dr. Brzynski's non-toxic Antoneal Plaston Therapy. A 2005 clinical trial report using only radiation and chemotherapy found that 5 of 54 patients or 9% were cancer-free at the end of treatment. While a 2008 clinical trial report using only Antoneal Plastons found that 5 of 20 patients or 25% were cancer-free at the end of treatment, with no toxic side effects. Jody Fenton is one of them. If Jody Fenton had undergone the therapies, or really prescribed to her, her life would have been very different. Now she is alive, well, and prospering. It's as if she had a bacterial infection, and Dr. Brzynski treated it with antibiotics. Four years after my diagnosis, I had run into one of the neuroncologist that I met with, and told him that I had come onto Dr. Brzynski and I was cured, and he kind of wrote it off. I was very excited to tell him that I was cured, and he really burst my bubble about it. So it was somewhat depressing for me. Another doctor that I have when I told him I had anoplasmic astrocytoma, he was very excited. He's like bleep bleep bleep, you know, I can't believe this is you because you know what the prognosis for this is, and I said yes, he's like I can't believe you survived this, and he was very excited for me. Now if you ever going to go into cancer treatment, you do not want to go into childhood brain tumors, because childhood brain tumors by and large are 100% fatal. This would be the worst class of cancers to treat, but he began getting enormous success. I'll give you the worst type of cancer is inoperable, brainstem playoma. Usually it involves brain of children, and unfortunately, this is where it would be done. Radiation is the only treatment which can be used to slow time in progress, so that's the type of tumor for which there's no curative treatment, no chemotherapy which is approved, and numerous clinical trials performed failed in the past. We selected this type of tumor because we like to prove the point beyond any doubt that this type of cancer can be cured by the use of anti-oplastons, and we already have proof that it can be cured. She was diagnosed in March of 96, she was 11, and pretty much just started having a really bad double vision as how we discovered it, went to the eye doctor, and that's when they did the MRI and discovered it was a brainstem playoma, and they explained the hers was diffused, where it was like the healthy tissue and the cancerous tissue were swirled together, so of course surgery wasn't an option. With the radiation they suggested, her prognosis was probably going to be about eight to 18 months. The thing is with the radiation, what it would do to you from what I understood was they would shoot the beam through your ears, and the beam would burn your healthy and your cancerous cells outside in, so all your hair around your ears would be gone, never grow back, your ears would become deformed and burnt, you would become deaf because you couldn't hear, it would also destroy your pituitary gland, which is the gland that helps you grow as you hit puberty. Yeah, she was 11 at the time, and that was a real concern I had. And it make you stay in an 11 year old body, and basically in the end you'd become an an in a vegetated state, or you couldn't take care of yourself, which wasn't a very good quality of life. Because my big concern was with the oncologist originally that we were dealing with was, you know, how it was going to affect her development, and when she started to enter the teenage years, starting a period and growing and developing, and he just looked at me and said, well, frankly Mrs. Ressel, she's not going to live that long. What she would have to go through in those extra months, that would be horrible. I wouldn't want to go through it. Why do? You're handed the death sentence anyway, so what was the point of the radiation? You know, you then you have to say, okay, modern medicine doesn't have an answer. Let's find her out. Jessica Ressel's brainstem glioma was confirmed by an MRI and Springfield Missouri, and the Children's Hospital of St. Louis, Missouri. Jessie Ressel is writing on the best news she's had since March. She and her parents now believe they are on their way to a cure for what doctors had said was an incurable brain tumor. Here at the Burzinski Clinic in Houston, Texas, the Ressles have found an experimental drug they could only dream of eight months ago. That's when Jessie was still a fifth grader at a Catholic elementary school in Springfield. It's when one of her eyes started crossing in. She started seeing double. It's when Jessie went to the doctor and learned she had one of the most aggressive kinds of brain cancer. A malignant tumor doctor said would kill her within months and that radiation would only give her a little more time. And I would live for only three months and live in like pain and that's it and not like a fun life. Yeah, I was still dying. Today the medical pictures tell a different story. You can see the improvement immediately just looking at Jessie's eyes now compared to last May. An MRI on May 7th of 1996 revealed the size of the enhancing portion of Jessica's tumor. One month into starting antinatal plastone treatment, her tumor disappeared. However, given the aggressive nature of this type of tumor, it quickly returned in August and remained until November. In which time, Dr. Burzinski doubled her antinatal plastone dosage until her tumor went away in December. Only to return again in January of 1997, stayed around until April and finally disappeared in May of 1997, one year after starting antinatal plastone treatment. Jessica's tumor remained nonexistent up until October 2001 when her brainstem glioma was considered resolved. There were very few doctors that you would tell them you were seeing Burzinski that would be kind of encouraging and positive with you. Most of them, they would hear the name Burzinski and they wouldn't want to deal with you as they were afraid. I'm so relieved that we found Dr. Burzinski is literally it did save her life and here she is now 24 and she's got a little boy who's almost five and then she has her second baby I'll be born in October. We just found out she's having a little girl. Again, it's one thing to observe a single anecdotal childhood brainstem glioma survivor and it's another to see the results from FDA supervised clinical trials treating Jessica's type of cancer. Here is a table illustrating studies published in 2006 comparing the results of different childhood brainstem glioma treatments. There were three groups treated with radiation and chemotherapy and two groups treated with Dr. Burzinski's antinatal plastone. Out of all three groups treated with radiation and chemotherapy, only one of 107 patients or 0.9% or cancer-free after treatment. However, this patient did not live beyond five years, presumably being devastated by the amount of radiation and chemotherapy. Out of both groups treated with antinatal plastones, 11 of the 40 patients or 27.5% or cancer-free after treatment and 11 of the 40 patients or 27.5% lived more than five years. Most of these brainstem glioma survivors who were not previously subjected to toxic chemotherapy and radiation before starting antinatal plastone treatment have gone on to enjoy full healthy lives. So the good news is that the cancer can be cured, the worst type of cancer can be cured. For good, the people who are surviving, they live number life. No side effects or treatment, no symptoms, no sign of tumors, back to life. We started sound them as children and they have their own children. There is no impairment of fertility. They just live normal life. The bad thing, however, is that we know that we can have not everybody, but some of these patients. Well, if about a terrible sign of patients can survive five years and an unmodified live-over, 10 years without a sign of cancer, that's a good thing. But obviously, this is just the beginning. We need to perfect this. We need to introduce the newer generation of antinatal plastones, which we call second and the third generation of antinatal plastones to make the treatment more effective to cover growth spectrum and to be easier to administer. They came back. They said she has this large baseball-sized tumor in her abdomen and not only that, but it's in her kidney. It was like everywhere. It was like in her liver and her lungs. In her kidney and her lungs, so here we are thinking basically this child has literally a few months to live as basically what they told us. At that point they said, well, we think we can get the original tumor out. So they had this surgeon. He was able to go in. He got the whole tumor. She did lose her left kidney and her left adrenal gland. And it was four drugs and it was like eight pages of side effects and very little hope that it would even work. So because the drugs were might attain. That's 3%. At top of the side. And it's just platinum. And they told us admittedly this is the most toxic regimen that we have. We have a six-month old with one kidney and the side effects were like kidney failure, hearing felt leukemia. I mean other kinds of cancers coming from this and I was just like even if she's going to pass away, I can't do this to her. I can't because it's like why would I want her last few months of life to be miserable? I didn't know what to do. I just knew that I didn't want to put her through all that intense high dose chemo and miss out on what might be the last bit of time that we have with her because I talked to my uncle. He's in his 60s now but when in the in 1969 my cousin his daughter was like three and she had she got cancer or some kind. And he told me about what that was like in that time and they just kept giving her more chemo and more chemo and more chemo and then finally we had this long several hour conversation one day and he told me I asked him because I prepared myself who was trying to prepare myself. I said what is it like when a doctor tells you that's it. I can't do any more. And my uncle Ray told me that for the last few weeks of my cousin's life they celebrated Christmas once a week and they had a Christmas and a rebirth they once a week until I was it. And I just I was putting myself in his shoes and I was thinking I was just thinking that I couldn't watch my daughter with her away and that if I wanted to be at least I wanted whatever time I had to be happy as happy as could be anyway and not I don't know not just watch her with her away from chemo that's not doing any good anymore. We had actually asked the endocrinologist at in the ocean about Dr. Mizinsky and he told us he was a quack and that there was no evidence that that worked but at that point it was like well yours doesn't really work either. The the other thing that I did on the FDA's website you can look up the date at which any drug was a granted FDA approval and I realized that the oldest drug they wanted to give her and come out in the early 70s. The newest drug they wanted to give Kelsey came out around 1988 and I and I realized this isn't the cutting edge of technology this is they're they're giving us the same old the same old stuff that I just thought well this reticulous it felt to me like they were grasping straws. I was doing all that research and Sarah and Susan found the Mizinsky clinic you know Sarah said well I want to I want to take her there you know I looked at it like well you know if she's got approximately nine months to live then you know we come over here and we don't have all the side effects will you know in nine months time which might be better off doing if the end at the ending result is the same. Upon the removal of Kelsey's left kidney and left adrenal gland her diagnosis was confirmed at the University of Texas Medical Branch and again at MD Anderson Cancer Center where a month later MD Anderson also confirmed that Kelsey's cancer had spread to her lungs after desperately researching Kelsey's situation her family decided to decline all chemotherapy treatments offered by MD Anderson and instead enroll Kelsey into one of Dr. Bresinski's clinical trials by this time Kelsey's cancer had also spread into her liver after starting her anti-neoplastone treatment the tumor in Kelsey's liver was gone by August of 2007 CT scans of her chest revealed six tumors in her lungs at the start of treatment one by one the tumors and Kelsey's lungs began to go away leaving one small spot four years later which was deemed to be inactive and most likely scar tissue today Kelsey Hill is considered to have had a complete response to her anti-neoplastone treatment since Dr. Bresinski began treating cancer patients with anti-neoplastons he has successfully treated virtually every type of cancer relieving thousands of families from across the world of the Strait disease yet unlike other clinical trials which are supported by billion dollar pharmaceutical companies and are often assisted by large tax funded research grants from the National Cancer Institute the United States government currently prohibits any taxpayer money to be granted to Dr. Bresinski's FDA approved clinical trials same with face three trial will cost about 25 million dollars so how many can you run okay you may run few at best nobody's giving you money for that we have to make money for that okay and it's 25 million dollars okay some other financial companies come with the idea they go to a national cancer institute and they receive handsome grant 15 million dollars whatever okay and they do clinical trials nobody's giving me any money okay and I'm working like in the wartime condition okay I like working somewhere in the Gaza Strait West Bank okay and the bombs are falling you have to take patients you have to do face two clinical trials given the existence of a treatment that is curing cancer at a rate that traditional medicine could only dream of and doing so without any damaging side effects most would assume that every penny of our tax dollars allocated for cancer research would be thrown in Dr. Bresinski's direction the problem that we face however is that a huge financial house has been built on the paradigm of purging the body of cancer cells Bresinski's discovery means that the foundation the walls and the roof of that house need to be replaced fake about it you know you've got thousands of doctors in oncology and in oncology residency programs you've got the pharmaceutical industry pumping out chemo therapeutic agents every month there are all kinds of machines that deliver radiation you got all this stuff in the war on cancer and it's trillions of dollars I find it very interesting that we have all these walks for the cure of cancer you got all the risk back you got all the donations we're going to find a cure this decade all this money keep pouring in and it all goes to the same guys the pharmaceutical industry is arguably the most profitable industry on our planets with its profits being triple bat of all of the fortune 500 companies rising profits result in rising stock prices the only way this industry can sustain this profitable momentum is by continuing to introduce new patented drugs and since the pharmaceutical industry relies on the FDA as its gatekeeper to introduce these new drugs it's in their best interest to ensure the FDA remains as compliant as possible and since the FDA is also an office of the United States government it's in the government's best interest to preserve one of its most powerful industries the former editor-in-chief of the new England Journal of Medicine Dr. Martia Angel has been very outspoken with the idea that it's time to take the food and drug administration back from the drug companies in 1992 Congress put the Fox and the chicken coop it passed the prescription drug user fee act which authorizes drug companies to pay user fees to the FDA for each brand name drug considered for approval the user fee act put the FDA on the payroll of the industry it regulates and it has drastically changed the way it operates the part of the agency that reviews new drugs now gets more than half of its money from the pharmaceutical industry the FDA's coziness with industry is underscored by the composition of its 18 advisory committees outside experts who help evaluate drugs incredibly many of these advisors work as consultants for drug companies the FDA behaves as though the pharmaceutical industry is its user not the public in 2010 the fee revenue paid by the pharmaceutical industry to the FDA has risen to over a half a billion dollars annually pharma now pays over 1.4 million per application for most cancer drugs submitted to the FDA to ensure a timely approval it's important to understand that neither Congress or the FDA had requested this new fee structure to occur instead pharma itself went to Congress and imposed these new fees onto the FDA in essence purchasing the FDA's drug evaluation department from both the government and the public in a 2007 health policy report sponsored by Pfizer supporting the renewal of these user fees they revealed that the medium review time for priority drugs those for serious life threatening diseases that lack satisfactory treatments such as cancer was sped up from 21 months in 1993 to six months in 2004 dozens of cancer therapies have been reviewed and approved within three or four months meanwhile dr. Brzynski his patients and other supporting scientists have made every conceivable effort to get the FDA and thus the government to cooperate in the research review and approval of anti neoplastons since 1977 before I started I asked the lawyers for the advice can I use experimental treatment which was the treatment of the plastons can I use this in my private practice and can I be involved in cancer research simple as the private company dr. Brzynski's attorneys investigated both state and federal law to find out if it was legal for him to start his own biomedical research company making anti neoplastons and administering them to his patients within his private practice they found that according to both the Texas state and federal law the use of any drug or new drug can be used to meet the immediate needs of the patients of a licensed doctor particularly when there is no other available option for them the law stated that such activity was not governed at the time by the Texas Food Drug and Cosmetic Act and is not otherwise unlawful under the laws of the state of Texas however dr. Brzynski would not be legally allowed to introduce or deliver anti neoplastons into interstate commerce which means he had to keep his activities only within the state of Texas to avoid breaking any federal laws as long as he did this his actions were not within the regulatory authority of the FDA however once word began to spread that dr. Brzynski was successfully treating what was once considered terminal incurable cancer patients people began traveling from all over the country to receive anti neoplastons treatment for a long time I didn't have any contact with Texas Board of Medical Examiners until around 1984 some of my patients told me that they were approached by the agents sent to them from Texas Board of Medical Examiners who were trying to convince them to fight complaints against me so this was shocking to me and what is surprising that they were using the state money they were in tax-based money to travel a long distance like from Houston to California to convince our patients to call for you to fight complaints against me this was completely irrational but nothing else happened at that time until I met by a coincidence vice president of the Anderson Cancer Center dr. Hiki who informed me that I would have problems this time with Texas Board of Medical Examiners and obviously the problems began and I was called to Texas Board of Medical Examiners they began investigating me however they were now complaints from the patients the patients were happy we're treated in patients who were very advanced for whom there was not even available and they were getting good results so apparently there was no justification for such action this was very unpleasant investigation they were trying to convince me again to stop my research to stop the patients after about two years of going back and forth and being called to the board finally they proposed to me that I should present to them a number of cases of patients who benefited from my practice and they informed me that such medical records we be reviewed by expert oncologist and if they are satisfied that I am not having patients that the patients are benefiting from my activity then they will leave me in peace I was very happy with this I believe that Texas Board will do objective review of our results and finally they will leave me alone because we have amazing results in the deep and very difficult cancer cases I supplied to them twice as many medical records which show without any doubt great results in the cancer treatment incurable forms of cancer completely disappearing with patients going to complete the mission and patients who were cured and living normal life after that in 1986 Dr. Brzynski agreed to present to the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners 40 cases of various types of cancer he had successfully treated using antinopleestons in patients ranging from breast bladder lung liver brain head and neck and lymphoma after submitting these cases to the medical board he didn't hear back from them leaving him to assume that the board was satisfied and would leave him in peace however two years later the board came back again pretended that the cases he submitted were not successful and claimed he was violating a law that didn't exist which was grounds for the board to cancel revoke or suspend his license the medical board had no case against Brzynski which prompted the board to file their first amended complaint in 1990 still the board had no case which prompted them to file a second amended complaint in 1992 the medical board kept coming back each time with the same argument practically making Xerox copies of their prior claims changing the titles and simply resubmitting them after about five years of this 60 of Dr. Brzynski's patients petitioned the board to stop harassing their doctor the board then tried to ignore these petitions by attempting to strike them from the record finally in May of 1993 this case went to trial the tumors will grow they will use the vision they will be paralyzed and they will die because there's nothing in the world which can be used to save these patients life you intend to continue doing just what you've been doing until somebody is able to stop you is that not true I'm going to do what the law will allow me to do mr. Harkam I do whatever is necessary to bring my medicines to approval in the United States and everywhere in the world and bring you to justice for causing the deaths of 200 patients that it will come back here to hunt you until you are dead are you threatening me Dr. Brzynski I'm not threatening you but that's what's going to happen in the future well I think that's something that'll be remains to be seen I'd never heard of Dr. Brzynski I didn't know anything about him I never was quite clear what the board's problem was the board did not bring any expert witnesses contest points that were raised by Dr. Brzynski now without an expert witness to render an opinion in certain areas I can't give any credence to opinion raised by a layman and Dr. Brzynski brought in Dr. necklace patronus some of the most dramatic testimony on Dr. Brzynski's behalf came from Dr. Nicholas Patronus a Georgetown University expert who was a member of the National Cancer Institute's team that analyzed seven of Dr. Brzynski's cases the basic conclusion was that in five of the patients with brain tumors that were fairly large the tumor resolved disappeared it's amazing the fact that they are leaving it's impressive and unbelievable he was quite a witness he said he had never seen anything like what Dr. Brzynski was able to accomplish with his anti-neoplastons and brain cancer he had one young boy there who had been treated about toy of it the hearing strapping lad a good sized boy but when he was he was first started on treatment when he was about four years old he's name was Paul he was given up on by his original doctor when Mary Michaels took the stand on behalf of her son Paul she trained her eyes on the state's attorney I mean I have enough to worry about when I go to bed at night about my son and my family I don't need to worry that this treatment is going to be taken away what do you think point happened if I don't remember I have no other questions for all I know the kid may still be alive the judge ruled in Dr. Brzynski's favor finding that the medical board did not introduce any evidence at the hearing that anti-neoplastons are not safe and effective nor did they introduce any competent or substantial evidence at the hearing that anti-neoplastons are not generally recognized by experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate their safety and effectiveness and as far as the law goes it does not apply to a licensed physician who manufactures his own medications and solely uses it on his own patients in the state of Texas now most would think that at this point the Texas medical board would stop wasting their time Brzynski's time terminal cancer patients time and the taxpayers money pursuing a case they knew they couldn't win didn't they told me after they were going to rewrite my proposal for decision and take adverse action against Dr. Brzynski and I said I thought that's rather foolish well think again the state of Texas once used in Dr. Stanislaw Brzynski to stop treating his patients with drugs he produces at his own pharmaceutical plant the drugs called anti-neoplastons are non-toxic compounds of proteins and amino acids often lacking in cancer patients even though the state of Texas acknowledges that the drugs may be helping some who are terminally ill the state says the drugs shouldn't be used this is the state board of medical examiners which licenses doctors in Texas this is the agency challenging Dr. Brzynski in court one judge has already told the board members that they don't have a case all of this nonsense is very now should disappear because they should realize that I am right okay they're fighting losing about to I am saving human lives and if they put me out of business the people will die this is the brain of an eight-year-old boy with a huge tumor most thought would kill him he used Dr. Brzynski's drug images of his skull taken six years later show the tumor has almost disappeared Dr. Bruce Cohen is the director of neurologic oncology at the prestigious Cleveland clinic the only explanation is it's shrunk because of the therapy Paul has received he confirmed Dr. Brzynski's results on Paul seven years that we've had Paul and he's unhealthy and I owe it to this man and there's no way they never people to think him enough for what he's done for us today that boy Paul Michaels and his anxious family sit in the courtroom with other patients undeterred by the 1993 ruling the Texas Medical Board took Dr. Brzynski to a higher district court of course this time they knew they couldn't raise any issues about whether or not his treatment was effective the Texas State Board of Medical examiners which has fought to suspend Dr. Brzynski's license because his treatments have never been approved says quote the efficacy of anti-neo plastons in the treatment of human cancers is not of issue in these proceedings it takes a bureaucrat to come up with that idea because a layman that would really be the question Dr. Brzynski has won his latest round in court the medical examiner's order was reversed but that is not expected to be the end of his trouble with the state of Texas the Texas Medical Board took this imaginary case all the way to the Texas State Supreme Court where the judge issued an erroneous probation order against Brzynski which Brzynski successfully served but again leaving the Texas Medical Board completely unsuccessful in their efforts to remove his medical license so if efficacy was not an issue and Dr. Brzynski wasn't breaking any laws then why would the Texas Medical Board continue on with this empty pursuit well it was eventually realized even by the mainstream press that the Food and Drug Administration had been pressuring the Texas Medical Board to continue trying to take away Dr. Brzynski's medical license for this story we wanted to talk to the FDA about its policies and procedures the agency did agree to talk to us on background where it wouldn't be quoted but it repeatedly refused our requests for on camera interviews while they were busy pressuring the Texas State Medical Board to try to revoke Dr. Brzynski's medical license they were even busier trying to revoke Dr. Brzynski completely from society by trying to place him in prison. The FDA and Pharma quickly realized that if Dr. Brzynski's discovery would be given a fair review process not only would chemotherapy and radiation dwindle into obscurity financially crippling the industry but it would also mean that for the first time in history all of that income would funnel away from Pharma and into the lap of one single scientist who holds the exclusive patent rights. Apparently the FDA had not ruled out the possibility of this happening one day. On March 12, 1976 FDA Bureau of Drugs Director Richard Kraut states in the Cancer Letter when anyone other than large institutions ask permission to conduct clinical trials you want harsh regulations. Sometimes we say it is proper to hinder research and once these guidelines were adopted the FDA would consider itself bound by them. In 1982 Kraut states again I never have and never will approve a new drug to an individual but only to a large pharmaceutical firm with unlimited finances and so the fiercest fight in FDA history began. Dr. Brzynski's dealings with the FDA commenced in 1983. At that point the FDA commenced a civil action to try to close the clinic and stop all patients from receiving the medicine. Before the judge in this case had announced her ruling the FDA sent her a letter warning her in advance if this court declines to grant the injunction sought by the government thus permitting continued manufacture and distribution of anti-neoplastones. The government would then be obliged to pursue other less efficient remedies such as actions for seizure also known as raiding his clinic and home and condemnation of the drugs also known as a propaganda campaign or criminal prosecution of individuals also known as throwing Dr. Brzynski in prison regardless of these threats from the FDA. The judge in the case basically said that he can treat anybody once in Texas but he can't ship his medicine in interstate commerce. The FDA viewed that as a failure and told Dr. Brzynski's at the time his attorneys at the time that they have other ways to get him. Let's talk about the other ways. In 1985 the FDA convened a grand jury to hear evidence to try to indict Dr. Brzynski. In connection with that they had a raid of his clinic where they seized 200,000 pieces of paper including all of his medical records of all patients. Little difficult to practice medicine when you don't have medical records. Obviously they came out and they confiscated all of our medical records and it took us about 12 years or 14 years to recover these medical records. In the meantime we are permitted to make copies of medical records in their office but it was also the neglect of human well-being, weirdly in very sick people. They took medical records and we needed these medical records to really fight for the lives of this patient but they took this away. They didn't care for these patients. The patients could die. They were not important. They presented the evidence to the grand jury no indictment. 1986 they come back, sees another hundred thousand documents, no indictment. 1990. Another grand jury, either the second or the third. They present more documents Dr. Brzynski testifies extensively before the grand jury, no indictment. 1991 to 1993. FDA investigates Dr. Brzynski. We don't know if evidence was presented to another grand jury. 1994 another grand jury, no indictment. 1995 another grand jury. This grand jury started in March of this year. On March 25th I believe it was Dr. Brzynski along with a few of his patients appeared on CBS show this morning. Let me play devil's advocate. Here you all very desperate folk had had undergone some cancer treatment. Correct? No, I don't offer you. I don't offer you. Let me go after these guys. I had undergone some treatment. Could it not have been that that treatment that you received prior to Dr. Brzynski's treatment was what in fact really cured you. Well I'll jump on that. No way because the recurrence I had was in a brand new spawn that had not been involved before. So if all the punishment that I went through for the year went out of my system and after went out of my system all of a sudden a new tumor comes in. How could that first treatment have the help the subsequent tumor? Later that day the FDA came another rate. More patient documents. More subpoenas. We were flooded with calls last Friday with people wanting to know how to get a hold of you. They're going to see this story this morning. See that you've been rated by by the FDA and they're going to want to know if you're for real or if the concerns are of the FDA they have something to do with with your treatments and the viability of your treatments. Well I don't think let me jump in here. I don't think there's really an issue as I mentioned regarding the safety of the drug and the FDA isn't contending at this point that the drug doesn't work. The only issue is that according to the FDA it has not been proven by controlled clinical trials. So at least in terms of safety the FDA isn't saying that it's not safe and the FDA isn't even saying that that it doesn't work right right now they're just contesting or apparently they're contesting whether Dr. Bersinski himself has been shipping the medicine out of state which in some respects is quite ridiculous since he has approval to ship the medicine out of state to various cancer institutions around the country. He ships it out of the country to various countries because it's being used in other places and he ships it to individuals who have been granted permission by the FDA to receive the medicine under what's called a compassionate use I&Ds. Okay. May, June and July more witnesses testified before the grand jury more documents. So we've had now four, five or six grand juries. Let me talk about the subpoena practices. Most recently the FDA has now subpoenaed the medical records of every patient who has gone on TV and told their story about Dr. Bersinski. We'll let the committee judge what they think of that. We talk about dissemination of false information by the FDA. 1985, FDA tells anyone who calls an inquiring about Dr. Bersinski that he's being criminally investigated. When the judge in the case found out about that, he issued a cease and a strong reprimand against that. The FDA now has refined this tactic. Instead of waiting for people to call up the FDA, what they've done is subpoena all the records from Dr. Bersinski about his business associates and all the researchers around the world and there are many of them who are researching anti-neural plastics is therapeutic. Now what they're doing is systematically contacting everyone who does business with them, who may do business with them and telling about the grand jury investigation subpoenaing documents. I believe that they're doing this in order to make the FDA to make it more difficult for him to do business. I'd like the following questions to be asked the FDA. How much money have they spent in the last 10 years to try to put Dr. Bersinski out of business? How many documents can they subpoena and how many more grand juries does he have to go to? And why can't patients who have advanced cancer see the medical treatment of their choice? Upon the commencement of the FDA's 1995 grand jury against Dr. Bersinski, an oversight and investigation subcommittee was organized by Congressman Joe Barton in an attempt to intervene in the FDA's relentless harassment of Dr. Bersinski and his patients. In my opinion, you have every right to use the investigative authority in the judicial resources of the federal government to the justice department to convene a grand jury. That's very appropriate. The first time, perhaps even the second time, it becomes questionable the third time, the fourth time and the fifth time, it is not, I think, an unlawful conclusion to think that the FDA has a vendetta against Dr. Bersinski or wants to retaliate for some reason. That's my opinion. How many grand jury investigations have to occur that result in no finding a fault before you, as commissioner of the FDA, would encourage those within your organization to cease and desist? Mr. Chairman, how do you know that there were no findings of fault that were returned from that grand jury? There have been no indictments returned. Mr. Chairman, I ask counsel to comment, but I don't think those are the same, as a matter of law, those are the same things. I'm baffled by the splitting of hairs here, but I'm just trying to understand the exchange between the witness and the chairman. What I understood, the chairman to say is that there have been four grand juries convened, at least four. I just am left then with rather strong inference that if you convene four separate grand juries and there's no indictment returned. Notwithstanding the prosecutors telling me it's always that it's possible to indict a ham sandwich that probably there's not much there. Dozens of Dr. Bersinski's patients who had traveled to Washington, D.C. from all corners of the United States stood up and expressed their outrage with the FDA and commissioner David Kessler. The FDA has made a list and decided who can live and who will die. I guess I didn't make that list. I have had no chemotherapy. I have had no radiation. I chose Dr. Bersinski instead after a lot of research and a lot of searching. I've been in remission since 1989. Dr. Kessler, I'm not a statistic. We're frustrated. There are rights constitutional rights have been violated. This has got to end. My children are asking me, daddy, what is the future hold? My one daughter wrote a letter to the president of this country and said, please don't pull the plug in my daddy. And that just broke my heart and broke my wife's heart. My husband is a walking miracle. Sixty months ago, the doctors told us there's nothing else they can do. And they told us to enjoy what little life he had left. Look at him. He by 32 miles after being on Dr. Bersinski's treatment for two months. And they're saying, we can't it. I have a report from my family physician, which tells how well I am doing. My tumors are leaving my body and my condition is improving every day. Now the FDA is saying to me, no, your doctor is a criminal. He should be put in jail and he needs to be shut down. This is criminal. I want the FDA to get out of our lives and stay out of her doctor patient relationship. What the classical conventional medicine had to do for me was there, nothing. For me, the next thing was the minister. I did not want to undergo chemotherapy, which I had a new name for, Killam therapy, or any type of radiation. I was extremely lucky. I found Dr. Bersinski. And I don't want the FDA to take this right from me. I came 18 years ago from communist Romania. And the tyranist dictator, Chaușescu, never stopped a doctor from treating anybody. How can we have something like this in United States? Barely a week after these hearings, on November 20, 1995, Dr. Stanislav Bersinski was indicted. Bersinski was charged with 75 counts of violating federal law and fraud. If convicted, Bersinski would face a maximum of 290 years in a federal prison and 18 and a half million dollars in fines. Not to mention what would happen to his patients. He is their last chance for life. But now the federal government is issuing a death sentence for the patients of this cancer doctor. On February 9, Houston federal court judge Sim Lake, rule Dr. Bersinski's treatments have been, quote, illegal under Texas and federal law since 1984, and he ordered them stopped on all but a handful of patients. Then he put a stay on his own order, a stay of execution. I believe that most of these found it 300 people will die within short period of time even if it's not. In 1996, not only did scores of Dr. Bersinski's patients return to Washington, D.C. to protest his indictment, but many of them testified again before another congressional hearing headed by Congressman Joe Barton. Our first witness is Mary Ann Kenaeri, is that correct? Yes, that's correct. From Aurora, Minnesota. This is Dustin Kenaeri and he is on Dr. Bersinski's Antonyo-class treatment. This is my husband Jack Kenaeri. Now in February of 1994, our lives were drastically changed. My son Dustin was only two and a half years old at the time. He was diagnosed with a brain tumor at the size of a golf ball. The surgeon removed 75% of his tumor and the remaining 25% was diagnosed from a biopsy as a malignant, very aggressive, medular blastoma, brain tumor, one of the most deadly forms of brain cancer. The doctors told us Dustin had only a few months to live. The first treatment offered us was radiation, but the radiation doctor told us that his young age, Dustin would become a vegetable and it would only extend his life for maybe a few months. The next doctor wanted us to enroll Dustin in a experimental chemotherapy, which was highly toxic. The side effects would include hearing loss, kidney and liver damage, bladder, stunted growth, and a possible leukemia. One question I would like to ask is would you do that to your child? We weighed the harm. These experimental drugs would cause against the fact that they would not cure Dustin and decided not to subject him to these drastic measures. But our oncologists told us that their opinion took precedence over us as parents. This put added stress to the already stressful situation we are in. In April of 1994, we visited Dr. Stanzas Labrzynski in Houston. Dr. Stanzaski made us no promises, but said that he often had very good results with brain tumors. At worst, it would not hurt Dustin and it offered the best hope in a longer quality of life. An MRI six weeks after we started Dr. Stanzaski's treatment revealed no tumor. We were very overjoyed. Dustin continued antinuoplasty therapy. One year later, a tumor one inch by one inch in size was found on the MRI. That would be April of 1995. Dr. Stanzaski immediately raised Dustin's dose of antinuoplasty. There were still no harsh side effects at all. The next MRI in September of 1995 revealed that the tumor had almost disappeared again. To this day, it has not reappeared. If you look at Dustin right now, he is a happy, healthy, four-year-old who has all lived his prognosis. There is no traditional treatment that would have kept him alive with such good quality of life. FDA Commissioner David Kessler loves to grab headlines as a man who loves children so much. He wants to protect them from the ravages of smoking. You've Dr. Kessler loves children so much. Why have he and his agency spent trying so hard to cut off my son's last hope for life without this treatment? My son will die. This is a photo of Dustin Canari at four years old in 1996. This is a photo of Dustin Canari at 18 years old in 2009 and his brain cancer never returned. In 1996, because of pressure from the politicians and American opinion, FDA agrees to accept all of the patients whom we have at the time to the problem of face-to-clean catastrophes. Basically, we filed and received permission to proceed from the age for 72 different face-to-clean catastrophes which covered practically any type of cancer. This was such a tremendous work that basically it was necessary for me to work almost around the clock with six cyclotards who were typing different protocols and later I learned that FDA created special task force to be able to review this problem. You have some common soft tissues are common. This is special protocol for that. You have breast cancer, special protocol for lung cancer, a few different protocols for brain tumors about over 20 different protocols for different type of brain tumors. So just a year before his trial facing life in prison, the Food and Drug Administration had finally authorized the very thing that Dr. Brzezinski and his patients had ever wanted. Even still, the FDA would not back down and making sure Brzezinski's trial moved forward. Federal prosecutors concede that a cancer doctor they will put on trial here in January for using an innovative but unapproved drug has been saving lives. The prosecution marks the first time the FDA has tried to jail a scientist for using a drug on which he is conducting FDA authorized clinical trials. In a pre-trial motion, assistant US attorney Mike Clark objected to a defense request for the jury to visit the chemical plant where Dr. Brzezinski manufactures anti-neoplastone. The jury visit request is a thinly veiled effort to expose the jury to the specter of Dr. Brzezinski in his act of saving lives. Whether anti-neoplastone does or does not work is not an issue. And the jury should not be asked to decide the question. He added that if the issue comes up at trial, it would be an irrelevant, emotional, prejudicial, and misleading concern. The issue of whether anti-neoplastone's work may not even come up during the trial. The judge says that's not relevant, but the defense contends that's exactly the point that what was done in developing the drug and administering it was done to save lives. This trial cost the American taxpayer $60 million, while costing Dr. Brzezinski over $2.2 million. $700,000 of Brzezinski's legal defense was raised primarily by Dr. Julian Whitaker through his newsletter, Health and Healing. After Dr. Whitaker wrote of the plight and injustice being done to Dr. Brzezinski, his readers sent in close to 18,000 checks in small donations for Brzezinski's legal defense. The trial is expected to last about two months. The jury will then decide whether Brzezinski is a fraud or a medical pioneer. On March 4, 1997, due to a deadlock jury, the judge declared a mistrial. And after saying the government had not presented sufficient evidence, he ordered that Dr. Brzezinski be acquitted of nearly half of the 75 counts. But the FDA was still not backing down. They took Dr. Brzezinski to trial again, though after apparently accepting the absurdity of their case, on May 19, the FDA suddenly dropped 40 of the 41 remaining charges. The FDA's facade and trying to convince the world that Brzezinski was a criminal was completely unraveling. Even the jurors who voted not guilty in the first case took time off of work to join the patient's protest in front of the courthouse during the second case. I am appalled at the Food and Drug Administration and their actions. We're here today basically to protest the witch hunt that's going on by the FDA. We have to stick together and really support these patients that are suffering not only health-wise, but having to come down here to make a stand against the FDA. Please don't waste my money. Abusing the system to make sure that you maintain your power. The jury spent about three hours deliberating this house of cards, leaving Brzezinski acquitted of the final charge. Everyone in Dr. Brzezinski's patients now, every future Brzezinski patient is and will be on a clinical trial. There are many patients who would like to testify in our behalf and convince the jury and the judge that without the treatment they will die. But the judge did not admit any statements which could show that the treatment is effective. The judge did not allow the jury to visit our facility where we produce medicine. They were trying to keep it away from the jury if this information will be presented to the jurors. Then this trial would be finished very quickly. And that's what the jurors told us because after the trial we talked to the jurors and they were shocked that such information about that the treatment which is saving the life of patients not presented to them. And I was sick listening to the lies of prosecutors from US attorneys. It was not necessary for them to do it. They could tell the truth. They represented the biggest power but they still were doing this all the time. So they were trying to do it a sneaky way and that's what is horrible. Okay. That's what should be exposed because I think the United States deserves better. While all of this was taking place, Burzinski knew that the easiest way to keep the government from putting him out of business or in prison was to partner with an established pharmaceutical company. An interest was shown from Japanese pharmaceutical company Shugai and the Italian pharmaceutical company Sigmatao. But both deals eventually evaporated, likely due to the rapport developed so far between Antonio Plastons and the FDA. Being an issue indeed and were unable to verify the likelihood that they could openly and effectively work with the FDA. Then by 1990 it seemed that Burzinski's luck had finally changed. Burzinski had apparently treated the sister-in-law of the chairman and CEO of Elon Pharmaceuticals. Elon enthusiastically drafted a letter of intent stating they would aggressively pursue the filing of necessary protocols with the Food and Drug Administration for approval and marketing of Antonio Plastons as quickly as possible. They soon negotiated financing, licensing agreements and royalties. In the midst of closing this deal with Elon, more good news emerged. Dr. Davorit Samid. A scientist and medical professor from Maryland who Burzinski had hired to further study Antonio Plastons managed to present her work at an oncology symposium in Switzerland, which landed her and Antonio Plastons a cover story in a 1990 issue of oncology news. In 1989 we retained Dr. Davorit Samid as our consultant. Dr. Samid at that time worked at uniformed services medical school in Baltimore and later she moved to the National Cancer Institute. She did a lot of work with Antonio Plastons and Gryans. Unfortunately when the pharmaceutical company entered the picture such as Elon Pharmaceuticals, our consultant Dr. Samid became too close. She really became consultant for Elon Pharmaceuticals and she was working with Elon from this time. And suddenly, Elon Pharmaceuticals terminated their licensing agreement. Stating, Elon has significant doubt as to whether the active substances comprising of Antonio Plastons have patent thereby rendering an agreement meaningless. Antonio Plastons are not just one chemicals. You have different ingredients in Antonio Plastons. One of these ingredients was known and before we discovered this is a metabolite of Antonio Plaston and was known and was available before. So when we patented our invention our lawyers told us, look, you can't patent this particular ingredient because it was known before. So let's list it in your patent but don't patent this because you will never get patent for that. But this is the least important ingredient of Antonio Plastons. While this was an odd turn of events, more good news continue to pour in. It was in October 1991 when Dr. Nicholas Patronis led the National Cancer Institute on their site visit. The very same site visit Dr. Patronis would later base his testimony when defending Brzezinski against the Texas Medical Board. This site visit not only confirmed that Antonio Plastons were curing what was previously considered incurable brain cancer, but it garnered their interest in conducting a confirmatory trial under division of cancer treatment sponsorship at the National Cancer Institute. These trials involved most of their top experts, including Dr. Michael Friedman, the associate director of the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. In a memo addressed to his director, Dr. Friedman wrote, I thought you would be interested in this. Antonio Plastons deserve a closer look. It turns out that the agents are well defined pure chemical entities. The human brain tumor responses are real. The National Cancer Institute's decision network then convened and gave the green light to conduct government-sponsored clinical trials of anti-neo Plastons. Initially everybody was very excited about everybody who liked to proceed. The people who had reviewed our results, the experts from the SCI, they did a very good job. They were critical of course, but they were also highly complementary for the way we treat patients and the results we got. Everything should open and we won't fall. Suddenly everything came to the stop. Then we found that a few months later, Elon received permission to do clinical trials with this particular ingredient. However, it was pushed back for some like four years, and then Elon was allowed to proceed with this one suddenly. When Elon terminated their business deal with Brzezinski, they went behind his back, recruited Dr. Davor Samed and partnered with the National Cancer Institute, where Dr. Samed soon became a section chief. Elon then co-sponsored laboratory research and clinical trials, testing only this single ingredient called phenylacitate. The same chemical that Brzezinski was advised, he couldn't patent and had already proven to be quite limited against cancer as a single substance as far back as 1980. After the treatment and small number of patients, we found that the activity was quite limited. That's why decided to abandon phenylacitate and we use the other anti-neo Plastons. One of them contained phenylacitate as the second ingredient. Phenylacitate alone has very small activity, it's not very effective. In 1994, I started working for the Brzezinski. She did not let me know that one of those compounds is from Brzezinski, Dr. Brzezinski. It's just phenylacitate and show me all the published paper about phenylacitate and its analogues and their anti-cancer activity. It was quite imagined in the lab because if you find a compound that has anti-cancer activity and then you find a bunch of analogues. It's like you stumbled in a pound, a pie of gold. So people think they say, patents, patents, patents, that sort of thing. Devoted under her leadership, we find a lot of biological activities of these compounds. So