Stanislaw Burzynski: 40 Years of Selling False Cures

stanislaw burzynski with antineoplaston ftloscience post

9.6 million – this is the number of yearly deaths caused by one of the most deadly diseases we know today, cancer. However, many forms of cancer have no known conventional cure. This gap in modern medicine opens the door to those who care only for personal financial gain. By exploiting the desperation and hope of patients, such individuals offer alternative ‘therapies’ that range from meditation to expensive and potentially dangerous unregulated drugs. Just one of many who claim to have found an effective ‘cure’ for cancer is ‘Doctor’ Stanislaw Burzynski, who spent decades selling his false medicine to hundreds of victims.

Stanislaw Burzynski’s ANP Therapy

Stanislaw Burzynski was born in Poland in 1943. He earned his Ph.D. in biochemistry and his MD at the Medical Academy in Lublin and obtained a medical license for the state of Texas in the United States. In 1977, he opened the Burzynski Research Institute in the United States and became famous due to his claims of obtaining a universal cure to cancer. It is worth noting, however, that he never fulfilled the prerequisites of becoming a practicing oncologist.

During his time as a Ph.D. student, Burzynski came across some small molecules, which he called Antineoplastons3. Antineoplastons (ANPs) are small peptides and amino acid derivatives that occur naturally in the body and, according to Burzynski, form part of our defense system against neoplastic (abnormal or excessive) cell growth.

ANPs supposedly inhibit DNA synthesis of abnormal cells (i.e. cancer cells) by turning on tumor suppressor genes and turning off cell growth genes13. Burzynski backed his claims by isolating, purifying and testing these molecules, claiming to have successfully proven their efficacy in vitro (outside a living organism)4.

Chemical structure of one such Antineoplaston, which Burzynski claims to be a novel and successful treatment against cancer.

According to Burzynski’s findings, the isolated Antineoplastones showed very low toxicity and promising anticancer effects in animal studies. After identifying the active component of Antineoplaston – which he named Antineoplaston 10 (A10) – Burzynski was able to synthesize the molecule. This removed the need to extract ANPs from urine or blood, enabling it to be produced in sufficient therapeutic quantities.

What makes ANPs so different compared to other naturopathic remedies was that it was subject to clinical ‘tests’, with Burzynski publishing many papers about their safety and efficacy. A10 was even tested on animals, apparently showing promising results. These successful studies led to the drugs entering clinical trials, being administered to actual patients who suffered from different types of cancers. A10 lead to positive responses in 75% of the 49 treated patients, with only minor side effects, according to the findings5,6.

Clinical Results and Violations

The research papers published by Stanislaw Burzynski himself or his partners were subject to intense scrutiny, with many doubting the trustworthiness of their supposed clinical trials. Several government-backed organizations, such as the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) have voiced their concerns about the safety and efficacy of Antineoplastons.

Both a 2000 and a 2013 FDA inspection, unveiled several violations, including patients not meeting criteria for enrolment, the lack of reporting adverse effects, inflated success rates and missing MRI results. They also questioned the peer-review process, as the results that he did publish were in obscure or less reputable journals.

However, these were not the only things that put Burzynski in a bad light. As Antineoplastons are chemicals that are insoluble in water, they have to be dissolved as a sodium salt, which can then be administered intravenously (direct injection into the bloodstream). The high doses of sodium salts led to dangerous sodium levels in patients. Patients showed sodium levels up to 202 mEq/L (milliequivalents per liter), indicative of severe cases of hypernatremia – the normal sodium range is between 135-145 mEq/L.

Hypernatremia presents itself with mild symptoms such as fatigue and lethargy, but in the long term can severely affect the central nervous system, causing it to malfunction. When a threshold of 145 mEq/L was exceeded, treatment with ANPs should have been discontinued until it normalized, according to regulations. Despite this, ANP treatment was sustained in several cases, putting patients’ lives at risk – hypernatremia has a mortality rate of 15-20 %7,8,9.

intravenous IV bolus drip administration drugs
Antineoplastons are administered via IV bolus in their salt form, resulting in high sodium levels in patients

Alongside these clinical violations, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) also discredits the efficiency of the drug, citing third-party sources that report no tumor regression, as well as adverse effects that resolved after discontinuation of the treatment10,11. Many other scientists and physicians have raised their concerns about the treatment with Antineoplastons by now, calling it a scam with Burzynski benefiting financially; ‘treatments’ tended to cost up to hundreds of thousands of dollars per case.

The Perspective of Burzynski’s Supporters

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. Burzynski’s discovery means that the foundation, the walls … and the roof of that house, need to be replaced. You’ve got all this stuff in the war on cancer. And it’s trillions of dollars.

Dr. Julian Whitaker, fellow practitioner of alternative medicine

Despite the clinical trial violations, Stanislaw Burzynski maintains a large number of staunch followers. Part of the reason is due to Burzynski’s own published ‘scientific’ data, which stands in complete contrast to the NCI’s findings. According to his toxicology studies on A10, the treatment is ‘free of significant side effects’6. Several of his published studies even went so far as so state that many of his patients achieved a partial or complete recovery from their cancers following Antineoplaston treatment, as well as many cases of long-term survival (over 5 years)12,13,14. These success stories earned Burzynski his dedicated following, with some even testifying for him when he was on trial for fraud as early as the 1990s.

One of the most well-known cases was that of 6-year-old Crystin Shiff, who suffered from a highly malignant brain tumor. Her father, a police veteran, told her story in court. Crystin was apparently on the road to recovery thanks to Antineoplaston therapy, sadly passing away due to the damage that was caused by prior chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

News outlets increased the hype surrounding ANPs by reporting on several such cases, through which Burzynski highlighted that his novel treatment was safer and more effective compared to conventional therapies, even in the most aggressive cancers.

As to why his drug is not government-approved and distributed in order to save the lives of millions, Burzynski accuses the FDA and government organizations of actively trying to sabotage him. Teaming up with pharmaceutical companies, the government allegedly wants to maintain a ‘monopoly over medicine’, especially cancer medicine. Their investments in drug discovery and development would supposedly be threatened by Burzynski’s discoveries15.

It is worth noting, however, that Burzynski never actually filed a request for FDA approval of antineoplastons. Instead, he operated in a grey area, such that ANP therapy was not actually a ‘drug’ and hence not subject to the FDA’s strict regulations16.

Is ANP ‘Treatment’ Still Sought After?

Why was Stanislaw Burzynski so successful in selling his false cancer cures? If ANPs actually cured cancer, surely the world would have stood up and taken notice? For decades, ANP therapy survived lawsuits despite the medical and scientific community failing to replicate the results of his studies. In fact, it was the survivors – Burzynski’s self-proclaimed ‘living proof’ of the effectiveness of ANP – who influenced people around the world to come to him for treatments.

The media is widely to blame for propagating this as a ‘medical miracle’. They were quick to interview survivors and supporters of Burzynski, with the doctor himself being invited to speak on various news programs and television shows. Even more enticing for news outlets was the prospect of painting him as a brave maverick doctor, with his constant accusations toward pharmaceutical companies and governments for hiding his discoveries.

However, this all changed following a devastating blow to Burzynski’s credibility in 2013. A 6-year-old patient, Josia Cotto, was undergoing ANP treatment for an inoperable brain tumor when he became unresponsive, passing away not long after. The cause of his death was hypernatremia as exceedingly high levels of sodium were found in his blood, likely introduced through ANP administration. His blood sodium level was 205 mEq/L at the time of death, far higher than normal. Despite this, the family had paid the full $25,000 upfront for Josia’s 10-month-long ‘treatment’16.

But Josia’s death is just a single case of Burzynski’s victims. The website ‘The OTHER Burzynski Patient Group‘ tells the stories of countless patients whose treatment ended in disaster, just like Josia. Following this case, the FDA launched a thorough investigation into the safety and efficacy of the ‘treatments’ that were being conducted in the Burzynski clinic, uncovering the serious medical violations. In the 2013 FDA report, it is stated that 108 of such overdoses (across 48 patients) occurred during the trial, putting the patients’ safety into question7.

Despite all the evidence, to this day there still exist supporters of Burzynski’s Antineoplastons as a cure to cancer. Terminally ill patients who feel let down by conventional therapies still turn to alternative medicines such as aromatherapy and alkaline water. Practitioners of such forms of therapy are able to succeed by exploiting the desperation of patients in need of a miracle. In this regard, Burzynski’s scam was perhaps not the sale of false cures to those most vulnerable, but rather of false hope.


  1. World Health Organization (2018). Cancer.
  2. Cancer Treatment Centers of America (n.d). Cancer types.
  3. David Gorksi (2013). Stanislaw Burzynski: The Early Years – Part 1. Science-Based Medicine.
  4. Stanislaw R. Burzynski (1976). Antineoplastons: A Biochemical Defense against Cancer. Physiological Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 8, Nr. 3.
  5. Stanislaw R. Burzynski (1986). Antineoplastons: History of the Research (I). Drugs under experimental and clinical research, Suppl. 1, XII, 1-9.
  6. Stanislaw R. Burzynski, E. Kubove (1986). Toxicology Studies on Antineoplaston A10 Injections in Cancer Patients. Drugs under experimental and clinical research, Suppl. 1, XII, 47-55.
  7. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (2013). Inspectional Observations (Stanislav R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D., Clinical Investigator). 03/15/2013.
  8. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (2000). Inspectional Observations (Carlton F. Hazlewood, Burzynski Research Inst. Chairman). 09/13/2000.
  9. Navid Mahabadi, Srividya Naganathan, Mohammed A. Al-Dhahir. (Updated 2019 Jul 16). Hypernatremia. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing;
  10. National Cancer Institute (Updated 2019 Aug 15). Antineoplastons (PDQ?)?Health Professional Version.
  11. Jan C. Buckner, Mark G. Malkin, Eddie Reed, Terrence L. Cascino, Joel M. Reid, Matthew M. Ames, William P. Y. Tong, Silam Lim, William Figg (1999). Phase II Study of Antineoplastons A10 (NSC 648539) and AS2-1 (NSC 620261) in Patients with Recurrent Glioma. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 74:137-145.
  12. Stanislaw R. Burzynski, Rober I. Lewy, Robert A. Weaver, Maxwell L. Axler, Tomasz J. Janicki, Gabor F. Jurida, Jaroslaw K. Paszkowiak, Barbara G. Szymkowski, Mohammed I. Khan, Mark Bestak (2003). Phase II study of antineoplaston A10 and AS2-1 in patients with recurrent diffuse intrinsic brain stem glioma: A preliminary report. Drugs in R&D, 4(2): 91-101.
  13. Stanislaw R. Burzynski (2004). The Present State of Antineoplaston Research (I). Integrative Cancer Therapies, 3(1): 47-58.
  14. Stanislaw R. Burzynski, Robert A. Weaver, Tomasy Janicki, Barbara Szymkowski, Gabor Jurida, Mohammed Khan, Vsevolod Dolgopolov (2005). Long-term Survival of High-Risk Pediatric Patients With Primitive Neuroectodermal Tumors Treated with Antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1. Integrative Cancer Therapies, 4(2): 168-177.
  15. Merola Productions (2016). Burzynski: The Cancer Cure Cover-Up.
  16. Liz Szabo (2014). Doctor accused of selling false hope to families. USA Today.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Sean says:

    Haha if only we were bought and paid! All of our existing revenue streams are barely enough to keep the site online 🙁

    Please let me know where we can secure such funding!!

  2. brian green says:

    whats the mortality rate of chemo and radiation?

  3. Love is health says:

    This article is complete propaganda. if you have watched his court cases and seen how many successful cancer cases he has had then you would know it works, specially the numerous testimonials, and clinical trials that have been done, It’s also non toxic. What the FDA did to him is disgusting and is no different than words hat the mob would do. Any non toxic cheap especially natural treatment will not be allowed in the cancer establishment, as it would do away with chemo and radiation because those literally kill the body and are extremely painful and hugely profitable. Allopathic medicine is nothing but a symptom masking money making racket with no concern for human life. Most chronic health issues are due to diet and lifestyle which they don’t inspect or even ask a patient about.

    The idea that a drug(which has to be patentable, so they can make money) needs clinical trials even though it’s not toxic is nothing but bureaucracy so the thuggish FDA can control which go to market and which get terminated.

    Dr.Otto Warburg got a Nobel price for discovering that cancer only grows in acidic and low oxygen tissue, which is very easy to remedy but there is no profit in that treatment.

    The only way people can’t see the truth about this are either super ignorant or are bought and paid like these kinds of sites. I don’t know how you all sleep at night. I could go on but I’ll spare you.

  4. Sean says:

    Firstly, medicines that claim to cure disease but are not subject to rigorous clinical trials SHOULD be banned. Secondly, the FDA doesn’t ‘test’ drugs. It is up to the sponsors to generate the required evidence for safety/effectiveness. If a new drug costs less to manufacture, it benefits the patient and the company that manufactures it, ensuring continuous innovation and improvements (there’s a whole field of research based on ‘me-too’ drugs). Sure, a capitalism-driven drug economy isn’t perfect, but it in nobody’s interests to block approvals based on cost.

  5. California Sun says:

    I know of 15 proven natural cancer treatments (all said to have a 90%+ cure rate) that have been banned in the US for decades. I have recently read where the FDA will not test any cancer treatment that costs less than present AMA cancer treatments. You have to ask, what is the goal here, curing patients or maintaining excessive AMA income?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.