.jpg)
All Pages
- Home
- Pet Food/Treat Adverse Event Reports
- Report a Pet Food/Treat Adverse Event
- Pet Food Pledge to Quality and Origin
- Friends of TruthaboutPetFood.com
- Vindication
- Subscribe to the Newsletter
- New to TruthaboutPetFood.com?
- Contact Us
- About TruthaboutPetFood.com
- Pet Food Recall First Alert
- Petsumer Report
- Find Healthy Pet Foods
- How to Report a Bad Pet Food
Pet Food Article Categories
This is What We are Up Against
- 6-12-2011
- Categorized in: Pet Food Ingredients, Pet Food Regulations
Please watch this video before end of the day June 13, 2011. The true story of Dr. Burzynski fight with the FDA...trying to save lives. One of the most shameful displays of FDA arrogance and lack of concern I've ever seen.
I have heard of Dr. Burzynski for several years; the Grandmother of my daughter's significant other went to medical school with Dr. Burzynski in Poland. My daughter has shared with me stories of Dr. Burzynski's battle with the FDA. This film puts it all into place; Dr. Burzynski's incredible evidence his cancer protocol is safe and effective AND the incredible battle this hero has fought to save lives.
Please watch this video before midnight June 13, 2011.
Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business from BurzynskiMovie on Vimeo.
Once you watch it, you'll realize we - pet parents - have a similar incredible battle in front of us. We have the FDA standing firmly in the way of safe, wholesome pet food via FDA Compliance Policies that allow pet food to violate the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (at the same time being labeled as 'healthy' and 'balanced'). We have the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) standing in our way to safe and healthy pet foods with misleading pet food ingredient definitions and the inclusion of complete waste to be processed into pet food. And just as with Dr. Burzynski's battle, we have powerful lobby organizations (The Pet Food Institute) and trade organizations (Petfood Industry) preventing transparency in pet food and keeping regulatory authorities on (existing) task.
http://www.truthaboutpetfood.com/articles/disturbing-%28and-illegal%29-fda-compliance-policies.html
http://www.truthaboutpetfood.com/articles/day-two-aafco-meeting.html
http://www.truthaboutpetfood.com/articles/day-three-of-aafco-meetings.html
http://www.truthaboutpetfood.com/articles/of-significance.html
Without existing pet food waste ingredients and without FDA loopholes to compliance of federal food safety laws - there would be no place for billions of tons of waste (from the processing of human food) to go. So instead of waste being destroyed (or turned into something truly beneficial such as bio-fuel), regulatory authorities decided 'let's feed this garbage to animals...what the heck - they can't complain'.
There ARE pet foods out there that use 100% human grade ingredients - the same food you would give any member of your family. But these companies are NOT allowed to tell you they use 100% human grade ingredients (AAFCO regulations do NOT allow any reference to grade or quality of ingredients on pet food labels). Regulations make sure - the pet food purchasing playing fields all look the same.
Unknowing pet parents walk into a pet store...here's a $8.00 bag of pet food whose label looks almost identical to a $25.00 of pet food. The $8.00 bag of pet food contains ingredients that violate federal food safety law (utilizing FDA compliance loopholes); the $8.00 bag of pet food contains risky (if not lethal) chemical preservatives and dyes; the $8.00 bag of pet food contains ingredients FDA testing PROVED to be linked to euthanized animals.
'They' want all pet food to look the same; 'we' know for certain - all pet foods are not the same. 'They' are allowed to reprocess some of the most horrible waste imaginable into pet food; 'we' know for certain federal laws are being ignored.
This is maddening. Clear cut evidence the FDA provides pet food with loopholes to violate the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. And no one brave enough in Washington, D.C. to do anything about it.
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author, Buyer Beware
TruthaboutPetFood.com
PetsumerReport.com
What's in Your Pet's Food?
Is your dog or cat eating risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the 'rest of the story' on over 2000 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. www.PetsumerReport.com
Are you subscribed to Truth About Pet Food Newsletter? Click Here to subscribe.
Follow Truth about Pet Food on Twitter.
Become a Fan of Truth and Vindication on Facebook.
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
Email to Friend
Fill in the form below to send this article to a friend:
Thank you for sharing this. This makes me mad that this is where our tax dollars is spent and breaks my heart. I guess it's safe to say we won't be seeing Dr. Burzynski as a guest on Dr. Oz.
This situation brings to mind the near fiasco with thalidomide. Remember Frances Kelsey, the FDA inspector, was the only individual to refuse an application for sale in the US. Although thalidomide was never approved for sale in the United States, millions of tablets had been distributed to physicians during a clinical testing program. Pregnant women had been given the drug to help alleviate morning sickness or as a sedative, with a disastrous outcome. This give a glimpse into how ready the FDA is to approve a new drug!
On the other side, there is the Atkins diet story. His work was condemned and rejected for years. Then shortly after his death, his work was given a "thumbs up" by those who had claimed he was a fraud and a charlatan.
There are probably many other examples of the incompetence of the government to protect us from harm, especially when an agency like the FDA appears to be in the pocket of big Pharma. The "user fee" paid to the FDA is unbelievable and appears to be highly unethical.
While the true story of the Burzynksi clinic is not yet available, I am keeping an open mind about this. I hope that the FDA trials will be evaluated in a truthful and objective way.
I can hardly imagine what is going on in the world of Pet Food. It boggles the mind to think about the dealings in that arena.
Now it seems to me that FDA trials on this treatment would be easier to get started on animals...so where are these trials. This man is amazing
Thank you for sharing this video. It really sicken me about FDA and Texas State Medical Board. I forward Dr. Burzynsky information to our friend who has cancer and currently undergoing chemo therapy. It's a suggestion but why not to consider an alternative method instead of using poison injected to your body?
There are many many people out there willing to fleece cancer patients. Dr. Burzynski isn't a complete quack (he not only treats his patients with his miracle “cure” but he also uses cutting edge chemotherapy). Maybe he even believes his own hype. However, there are HUGE ethical problems with how he operates. You don't hear about the many people he has taken for everything they are worth before they died because, well, they aren't around to complain.
If you are a cancer patient you should go look at one of the big research centers like MD Anderson or Duke. Not some guy operating out of a strip mall in Katy, TX. 1.
He doesn't tell patients that if he treats them that makes them ineligible for other major medical research studies. He doesn't explain their other options, and by his actions removes these options for them. For instance, there are some very promising cancer vaccines but you can't take them if you have been treated by Dr. Burzynski. Depending on your cancer you will want to get into a phase II study with Avastin (Bevacizumab), XL184, BSI-201, dasatanib, dasatanib/erlotinib combo, tandutinib, vaccine therapy, etc. Dr. Burzynski knowingly removes these options for people.
2. He talks as if all these other cancer researchers want patients to die. “They” want to have to radiate little kids. “They” want them to have to take harmful chemo pills. I know MANY people in the field personally and professionally and they have dedicated their lives to helping people.
3. There are NO randomized studies that show his methods are effective. The patients that he has that recover are *also treated with a standard regimen*. He cherry picks the good cases to report as anecdotal evidence. He has had 30+ years to show success with randomized, research studies. I think the problem is he can't because it doesn't really work better than placebo. He has treated thousands of patients. With glioblastoma some small percentage (50 a year?) are cured in the world. We don't know why or how. But I can make any treatment look good by random chance because of that fact.
4. His “antineoplastons” are distillates of human urine. They are just short protein / amino acid chain. He decided this was the “cure” to cancer 30 years ago and hasn't really changed his approach since then as far as I can tell. Nothing he is doing is a big secret. This conspiracy crap is absurd, there is HUGE money to be made in curing cancer and this research has been public knowledge for 30 years. If it worked we would know about it.
5. His PhD is very questionable... first of all, it really is a “D.Msc” - as far as I can tell is short for “Doctorate of Metaphysics”. I originally assumed it was “Doctorate of Medical Science”, BUT, I have found no one using “D.Msc” for that and people using it for Metaphysics. Maybe he wants us to assume that? I have no idea what school it is from. At any rate, his M.D. was in 1967. His “PhD” is from 1968 - and by his own admission he did no independent research while in Medical School. I know some M.D. / PhDs. They did 6-7 years of research *independently* from their M.D. for their PhD. I think his claiming a PdH is baloney. He claims he is singled out for persecution and that these other doctors are all in bed with the big pharmaceuticals, blah blah blah. Well, maybe if you stopped lying about your education...
6. There are some scary stuff in the published results of his patients. His treatment itself can be harmful. In one study I looked at 1.5% of patients died from elevated levels of blood sodium!?! (They “didn't follow his recommended fluid intake instructions”?)
-paridel
Thanks for taking the time to share. I think you made a valuable contribution.
Paridel, I'm sure you are very well aware that the current treatments for cancer such as irradiation are proven to be much more harmful and have very serious repercussions, especially for children and the elderly. As a matter of fact Dr. Burzynski's treatment hasn't been proven to have any serious side effects. If you are going to make accusations about deaths causes by his treatment you need to provide evidence or at least the source of this study that you say you looked at, so we can see that what you read wasn't taken out of context.
There is no evidence Dr. Burzynski lied about his academic credentials, he is a MD, PhD in Biochemistry from the Medical Academy in Lublin, Poland, whether you like it or not. I am very suspicious of this claim as it seems to me a clear attempt at character assassination and fear mongering, especially since his credentials come from a non US school.
I am not sure if you watched the whole documentary, everything in this film is supported, cited, or actually shown (FDA court proceedings).
Your point #4 is also outdated, it is true that he started his treament with urine. Since 1980 he uses synthetic components.