by Jeffrey Dach MD
I was astonished, and very curious that the Television Networks allowed the Larry King – Suzanne Somers Knockout interview to air Friday night, Oct 23. I recorded the show and watched it Saturday night. Here is my review of the TV interview.
Suzanne’s Cancer Scare Nightmare
Suzanne was solo for the first segment, and related her “cancer scare nightmare”. One day, suddenly, she entered the hospital with respiratory distress, examined and told by six doctors her lungs were filled with cancer. She was offered chemotherapy treatment, and told to “put your affairs in order”.
Luckily it was all a false alarm. Eventually, a lung biopsy showed a common fungal infection called valley fever. During this cancer nightmare she contemplated her own death, and became more thankful for the love of friends and family. Additionally, she was motivated to examine alternative cancer treatments other than chemotherapy. Hence the book, “Knockout”, in which she interviews doctors curing cancer with non-conventional treatments.
In the next segment, Larry King introduces two doctors from Suzanne’s Knockout book. The first was Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D. isolated peptides called antineoplastins which have anticancer activity. Results have been impressive for brain tumors, such as the one that killed Ed Kennedy, and another type of cancer called lymphomas.
The second doctor from Suzanne’s book was Nicholas Gonzalez MD who treats cancer with high dose pancreatic enzymes along with a nutritional supplement program. Gonzalez has considerable success with cancer remissions in advanced cases, especially pancreatic cancer. This cancer treatment is based on a the Trophoblast Theory of Cancer.
The Defenders of Conventional Medicine
To balance off the medical heretics, two heavy weight cancer MD’s defended the cancer establishment, Otis Brawley and Keith Black.
Otis Brawley MD is Chief Medical Officer of the American Cancer Society, and professor of hematology, oncology, and medicine at the Emory University School of Medicine and Professor of Epidemiology at the Emory Rollins School of Public Health. I actually Like Otis, and he is a very likable guy, speaks well and makes a good impression. He has taken some very courageous stands, for example, he opposes mass screening with PSA tests for prostate cancer, and has personally declined a PSA test.
The second defender, Dr. Keith L. Black, is chairman of the department of neurosurgery at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. He was on the 1997 cover of Time Magazine as a “Hero of Medicine”. I haven’t seen him before, but on this TV appearance, he seemed stressed out, disagreeable, and out of sorts. He did not make a very good impression. We will find out why below.
Left Image: Book Cover Courtesy of Suzanne Somers, Knockout: Interviews with Doctors Who Are Curing Cancer–And How to Prevent Getting It in the First Place
Transcripts of the Interview
The complete transcripts of the interview can be found here.
Summary in a Nutshell
To cut to the chase, and summarize the outcome of the interview, Larry King did a great job as a facilitator. Ultimately the truth came out. The war against cancer has been a dismal failure, and the mainstay of conventional cancer treatment, chemotherapy, is largely ineffective against the majority of adult cancer types. Although alternative treatments hold promise for cancer cure, defenders of conventional cancer treatments remain closed-minded, staunchly defending the multi billion dollar cancer industry.
Lets go through the transcript of the show and take a look:
Larry King addressing Otis Brawley: What did you make of what Suzanne just said about cancer, chemotherapy, pancreatic cancer and the like?
Otis replies with comment about Blacks and Uninsured having higher mortality because of not enough conventional medicine, not too little. This is the old bait and switch. The question was cancer and cancer therapy, not the whole field of conventional medicine.
Otis completely sidestepped the question, showing his skills as a politician.
Next, Larry King asks the same chemotherapy question to Nicholas Gonzalez, MD. In a paradoxical twist, the Medical Heretic, Dr Gonzalez, defends chemotherapy. In essence, doing Otis Brawley’s job for him. Gonzalez also informs the viewers that chemo doesn’t work for the majority of major killer cancers.
GONZALEZ: I think there are cancers, unquestionably, for which chemotherapy works. And Suzanne named several of them. Hodgkin’s disease — they can cure 80 percent early stage with chemotherapy; testicular cancer, 80 percent, at least; certain lymphomas. Childhood leukemia can be cured with chemotherapy. But for the mass — for the mass of cancers, the major killers, such as metastatic lung, metastatic breast, metastatic colon, metastatic pancreatic cancer, unfortunately chemotherapy really doesn’t — it’s not curative. It may prolong life, but it isn’t really that beneficial. So we need to look at new options.
Next, Larry asks the very same chemotherapy question to Keith Black, a defender.
KEITH BLACK: Well, I — I think that it’s important for cancer patients to realize that we are making progress in the treatment against cancer. There is more promise. There is more hope. And we’re trying new, promising treatments that range from cancer vaccines that work with the body’s immune system to cancer stem cells. It’s important for all the patients to have information in a very scientific way and there ….. And there — it’s — and there are just so many chemotherapeutic agents now that are approved by the FDA, that we know prolong life, for a whole variety of cancers, I think we have to be very careful of the information we give to our patients.
Dr Black starts off sidestepping the question with pie in the sky nonsense about cancer vaccines and cancer stem cells, none of which are FDA approved, and are not available for clinical use. Then he finally gets to the point claiming there are many FDA approved chemotherapy agents “that prolong life”. Which is true.
They prolong life a few miserable months while the patient slowly dies an agonizing death. Dr Black sees this every day, and yet he lives in a fantasy world. Dr Black is believer in the church, and rises as a defender:
BLACK: But what patients need to realize is that the conventional treatments that are approved provide clear benefit to those patients.
What exactly is a clear benefit when the cancer patient, given chemotherapy, is either immediately killed from bone marrow suppression and immune failure, or dies a delayed death over a few months, suffering nausea, inability to eat, and wasting?
Next, Larry goes to the second Medical Heretic with the chemo question.
BURZYNSKI: Chemotherapy can work for some cancers, but cannot work for the majority of cancers. This year alone, two-and-half million people are going to die worldwide just with three cancers — lung, colon and liver cancer. So what does the chemotherapy cure for these people? It doesn’t not exist.
Larry then turns to Otis Brawley for a final stab at the question which he sidestepped initially. What transpires is an amazing display of courage and honesty from The Defender who admits that the dying cancer patient cannot be helped by chemotherapy, and should be allowed to die at a hospice facility.
BRAWLEY: Now, I’m the first to admit that there are some people who get chemotherapy who ought not — people who are getting it as a third or fourth line therapy for metastatic disease. Frequently, those people are getting treated because the patient wants treatment, because they don’t want to die and the doctor wants to give them treatment because the doctor doesn’t want to tell them that they are dying. And we need to actually start looking in — in the United States — into how we look at hospice and other things. But to say that people who have metastatic disease should not get chemotherapy, blanket and outright, that’s just harmful. And it’s actually going to hurt some people by saying that.
Although this is obvious to all of us, it is difficult for a Defender to admit that conventional medicine has no cure for cancer. Otis admits it is best to let the cancer patient die humanely, in hospice under heavy drug sedation.
Above image : Pet scan (above) and CAT scan (below). Cancer Tumor Mass pointed by red arrow. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
Next: Defender Keith Black again reiterates chemotherapy has benefits.
BLACK: There are a whole variety of cancers, including brain tumors — particularly pediatric brain tumors — and even adult brain tumors — that chemotherapy can benefit from.
Perhaps Dr. Black can tell us the benefit for Edward Kennedy who had the same dismal 12 month prognosis from his brain tumor as any one else. Where is the benefit there, Dr Black?
An Incredible Moment
Now we come to the most amazing part of the entire segment. Dr Burzynski is allowed to talk freely and explain his antineoplastins. This is something I never expected to see on national television in a million years, and credit is due to Suzanne Somers for making this happen.
KING to Burzynski: What — what do you mean by this plastin study, what is that?
BURZYNSKI: Anti-neoplastins, peptides, which I discovered, which can stimulate genes which fight cancer, and which can decrease the activity of the genes which cause cancer. These are molecular switches —
KING: You publish that?
BURZYNSKI: Yes, we publish — I publish about 300 articles —
KING cuts off Burzynski and asks Keith Black: Do you discount that?
KING asking Keith Black: Well, that seems revolutionary. Do you discount that?
Dr Keith Black Speaks With Forked Tongue
BLACK: Well, I — I — I looked at the chapter that Suzanne wrote in her book about Dr. Burzynski and I’ve — I’ve known of what he’s been doing. And I think — you know — the work that he’s doing, there’s no scientific evidence that it provides any benefit for cancer patients.
KING: You’re discounting all the work?
SOMERS: Oh my gosh.
BLACK: Yes. He’s treated over 8,000 patients with this treatment over 30 years. The papers that he has published have been too few papers — too few patients in those articles to come to any scientific conclusion. And in — in — in studies that have been reviewed by other doctors of his work, when he selected the patients, they found no evidence of any response of cancer patients to — to his–
Then why is he in Phase Two clinical trials? Why is he starting Phase three? I mean, to discount what Dr. Burzynski did, I think, is a great disservice to people listening also.
BLACK: Well, I mean, you know, the other thing, Larry, is that, you know, here are some abstracts that he wrote. And one of the patients that he describes as having a complete response to his treatment, it wasn’t a response because the patient had the tumor removed with surgery. He also states that there was no complications or very little complications in his treatment. And I’ve actually had one patient that went to him and had the treatment and almost died — went in a coma from the treatment.
This is a prime example of deceit by Dr Keith Black who is now fighting dirty, revealing his true character on national television. There is a personal hatred going on here.
Dr Black knows that invasive brain cancer is invariably fatal in a short time, and the majority of brain cancer patients go into a coma and die, just like Edward Kennedy did from his Glioblastoma.
It is very unusual and bad form for anyone to bring up individual patient cases on national television. This is done for only one purpose: to discredit Burzynski at any cost.
The same tactics can be applied to Keith Black’s patients. Virtually 100% of Keith Black’s invasive Glioblastoma patients go into a coma and die within 6-12 months of diagnosis, yet he is indicting Dr Burzynski because ONE patient went into a coma and ALMOST died. This is the natural course of the disease, and they all do that whether treated conventionally or non-conventionally. This is a bad disease.
To use this case to take a pot-shot at Dr Burzynski, a fellow MD PhD, is an inexcusable breach of ethics by Dr Black, indicating a personal hatred, and a hatchet job for the cancer establishment. Amazingly, Dr Burzinski refused to stoop to Dr Black’s level, and did not bring up the thousands of patients who have died while under Dr. Black’s care. How do I know this? That is the nature of the game for all oncologists and neurosurgeons who treat brain cancer. Virtually 100% of the patients with invasive cancer die under their care.
Next: Larry King gives Burzynski a chance to respond to Black’s allegations, who then informs the viewers that Black is lying through his teeth.
BURZYNKSI: Well, first of all, I don’t know why Doctor Black is not telling the truth. We conducted 12 Phase 2 clinical trials under strict FDA supervision. In every one of these trials, we have objective response to treatment. We proved the treatment works, that even can cure incurable brain tumors. The patients can live not only five years tumor free, but another 10 years tumor free, from the types of tumors where chemotherapy can do absolutely nothing. This is well documented. This was reviewed by the top specialists in the United States. But it was never reviewed by Doctor Black. He didn’t review even a single case done by us. Why?
I attended one of Burzynski’s lectures on gene silencing with methylation groups, and I can tell you the guy is a genius. Contrary to Black’s deceitful statement, there is plenty of scientific evidence. To review a few of the 300 scientific articles published in the medical literature showing superior efficacy of antineoplatins compared to chemotherapy and radiation, see this page: http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/ph/media-corner-publications.html
BURZYNSKI: Even the patients whom Doctor Black advised to not come to us, 11 years ago, for incurable brain tumors. Their scanned tumors are gone in two months, it is now 11 years later, they are in perfect health, living here in L.A. And Doctor Black will tell you, you’ll be wasting time and money. Why are you doing this, Doctor Black?
Dr Burzynski reveals startling information. For 11 years, Dr Black has advised his patients to shun Burzynski, yet they go to Burzynski’s clinic anyway and many are cured of “incurable brain cancer”. A remarkable statement.
Bottom line, Burzynski has a novel cancer treatment that works, and Dr Keith Black is spitting bullets of spite. The hatred, loathing, and condescension was palpable.
There was a lot more…to be continued…
Natural Treatment Cures Brain Tumor ?
Perhaps Dr. Black is unaware of these cases:
Articles with Related Content:
Larry King Suzanne Somers interview transcripts October 23, 2009
Dr. Keith L. Black, chairman of the department of neurosurgery at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, Cover Time Magazine – Heroes of Medicine 1997
CNN Interviews Suzanne Somers-Knockout
Disclaimer click here: http://www.drdach.com/wst_page20.html
The reader is advised to discuss the comments on these pages with his/her personal physicians and to only act upon the advice of his/her personal physician. Also note that concerning an answer which appears as an electronically posted question, I am NOT creating a physician — patient relationship. Although identities will remain confidential as much as possible, as I can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for any breaches of confidentiality that may occur.
Link to this article:http://wp.me/P3gFbV-xz
Copyright (c) 2009-2013 Jeffrey Dach MD All Rights Reserved. This article may be reproduced on the internet without permission, provided there is a link to this page and proper credit is given.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues of significance. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.