Updates made to The Millenium Project in June 2000

Policy statement (10/6/2000)
A couple of matters about this site seem to be confusing people. The first is that the content of this site is opinion. It is my opinion, and if it does not match yours then that is too bad. Some people seem to be very frightened by my opinions, although I cannot understand why this should be so. If they have businesses or beliefs which are threatened by what I say on a web site which attracts only a minute proportion of visitors each month out of the hundreds of millions of Internet users, then perhaps they need to think about how strong those businesses and beliefs are. The second matter is that, because this site is an expression of my opinions, I will publish opposing opinions. From the first day this site appeared it has contained a statement that any criticism will be published here. It is not my problem if people (some claiming extensive and sophisticated research skills) have missed the warning. It was there, and the choice to write was always (and will remain) up to the writer. If you want privacy, don't write.

Speaking of complaints... (10/6/2000)
I have received a couple of emails from someone accusing me, among other things, of racketeering and mass murder. The latest missive takes me to task for something that I have not said yet but for which I am apparently facing imminent imprisonment. Now that my legal people and I have checked to make sure that it is not we who are hallucinating, you can read all about it here.

The Bleat Goes On ... (10/6/2000)
Sixteen different identities (including my mother and several versions of me). At least six announcements that someone had closed this site down (one of the announcements even signed by me!). To find out what this is all about, see the CCRG Correspondence File.

A cure for cancer? I doubt it. (10/6/2000)
Someone wrote to me recently and, as part of convincing me that I am "full of shit", he mentioned the "72 FDA-approved clinical trials" being conducted by the Burzynski Research Institute into treatment for terminal cancer. The Institute seems to be investigating the same treatment in all 72 trials based on a theory that all cancers are the same thing and all can be treated by the same medications.

The Burzynski trials are often offered by supporters of "alternative medicine" as examples of the imminent acceptance of the theories underlying the trials. That is, the fact that trials are being done is offered as some form of proof that the medical establishment accepts the principles on which the trials are based. This is nonsense. The FDA really doesn't care about clinical trials as long as certain ethical and legal requirements are met – you can't purposely harm people and there has to be a degree of informed consent. Those hated pharmaceutical companies are conducting thousands of clinical trials at any one time, but the proponents of quackery rarely suggest that this confirms the validity of science-based medicine.

A brief examination of the 72 trials suggests that there is really one trial, repeated 71 times for different cancer locations. (I did not say "types of cancer" because it seems to me that Dr Burzynski believes that there is only one form of cancer but it shows up in different places.) The method of creating a new trial is to pull the documentation for one into a word processor and change every occurrence of, e.g., "breast" to "adenoid" or "epiglottis".

I looked at one of these trials in conjunction with somebody who is a specialist in the area. The particular trial was "Patients With Carcinoma Of The Uterine Cervix And/Or Vulva" (see Note 2), and the person I spoke to was someone who has been working in the area of the detection of cancer of the cervix for the past 20 years (and had, in that time, never come across the word "antineoplaston"). He is an international speaker on the subject and is in the process of producing a book to be used in the training of laboratory technicians examining pap smears. Some things we observed in this particular trial were:

• Subjects had to be dying of cancer and have abandoned conventional treatment. People that were too sick, however, that is those who may die in the next two months, were not eligible.
• Anybody who got worse rather than getting better on the treatment could be removed from the study thus ensuring that only favourable results were counted. People who do not improve are counted as successes.
• Improvement would be essentially self-reported.
• Bizarrely, in the middle of the document it starts talking about cancer of the ovary (word processor find-and-replace failure?). While the ovaries are located somewhere near the cervix one would hope that a competent medical investigator would be aware that they are different things.

Another peculiar aspect of the Burzynski trials is that people have to pay to be experimental subjects and the amounts of money are not insignificant. I recently heard of a young boy whose parents who were trying to raise $14,000 just to get him into the program and were expected to find $4,000 a month to keep him there and I know of another case where parents were trying to raise $125,000 so that their young daughter with a brain tumour could receive "experimental treatment". (See Note 1) Normally, clinical trials are paid for by the person or organisation producing whatever it is to be tested.

It seems that Dr Burzynski cannot legally offer antineoplastons as a cure (or even a treatment) for cancer, but he can offer them to people as part of clinical trials. After the number of trials that have been conducted, and the number of years that the research has been going on, and the number of dollars that must have been collected over the time, it is surprising that the medical literature is not full of success stories and the intensive care wards empty of cancer patients. Unless antineoplastons don't cure cancer and the continuation of patient-funded clinical trials is just a scam.

Dr Burzynski is very welcome to enter the Millenium Project's Cancer 100 Challenge, and nobody would be more pleased than I to see him nominated for a Nobel Prize. Only if he can cure cancer, of course.

Millenium Bookshop opens (17/6/2000)
I have a whole lot of books on my bookshelf which have helped to educate and inform me. Now you can buy some of these from The Millenium Bookshop and help to pay the costs of running this site. I have even listed some books I don't like.

Laugh of the Week (17/6/2000)
I just love the courage of someone who writes using an anonymiser service so that not only is it impossible to find out the name of the idiot, but it is even impossible to reply to them. Frightened to give his name. Frightened to get a reply. Go on, clown, "emial" whoever you like.

Date sent: 16 Jun 2000 04:19:23 -0000
From: Secret Squirrel <secret_squirrel@nym.alias.net>
Subject: You have got to be Kidding!

I have seen a lot freaky sites on my travels....yours is incredible!
I am emialing every group you've listed encouraging action against you.....
You are a psycho!!!!!

Spam of the week (17/6/2000)
Spammers make themselves look even more ridiculous when they try to sell a multi-level scam to an anti-MLM web site by pretending that I wrote to them first.

From: jhorton@post.com
Date sent: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:25:19 +1000
Subject: RE: MY APOLOGIES rsoles Here is your info. -JSSC

************************************************** THIS IS NOT SPAM! You are receiving this email because you have either sent email to, or requested information from, one of our affiliates or websites.

<snipperoony>

Emetic and Laxative of the Week (25/6/2000)
Feeling clogged up inside? Here's just the medicine you need to get you going. It's a song about not-a-medical-Dr Hulda Clark by Murray Soehn.

Spam of the week (25/6/2000)
Another MLM spammer who thinks I am stupid enough to ask for information.

From: apw32@hotmail.com
Date sent: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 07:51:45 +1000
Subject: request for information

Recently you have requested information on a home-based business.

No, I didn't!

<snipperoony>

Jerk of the week (30/6/2000)
I thought the style was familiar in the anonymous message I received on 29 June (see below). I have received another one and a little voice keeps saying in my ear: "I've seen something like that before". I think I have made known my views on the cowardice and worthlessness of anonymous posters before, but I suppose you have to hide who you are if you just want to tell lies. For the record, I have had no heart trouble, my company is not "on the skids", and nobody has contacted the only Jason I can think of and he wouldn't be doing anything if anyone did. And, Mr O'Nonymous, when you start telling people that I wrote this myself, remember that I know how to spell the name of my employer. I don't know what "14 days and counting" means, but if it's some kind of threat ...

Oh, and another thing. Every time I get threatened and told that this site is being closed down, I am going to replicate it elsewhere on the web. The first mirror site went up today and is already working its way into the indexes of the major search engines. So the harder Mr O'Nonymous and his friends work to silence me, the easier it will get for people to see this site.

Subject: The Peter Bowditch Deathwatch
From: Anonymous <anonymous@anonymizer.com>
Date sent: Tue, 4 Jul 2000 12:58 -0700

14 days and counting......

It seems, Mr. Bowditch, your days are numbered in more ways than one. Not only is that grand icon of commerce, "gebeese", on the skids, but we understand you've had a spot of heart trouble. And heres the fun part: although, you thought you had your ISP in your back pocket, you might want to give Jason a call. Apparently even Jason is just a little fed up with you and your rather silly and intolerable antics.

And, remember Peter, (we're sure it's not the first time you've heard this one)....."you make your own bed".

Joke of the week (30/6/2000)
The laughs just keep coming, as people too gutless to say who they are write in with complaints. Here's a bit of free advice for "anonymous" – get your mum to sharpen the pencil for you before you write to my government, and ask dad before you send a fax to my Internet supplier (it's an expensive call from where you are). They will take as much notice as they did last time. Oh, was that someone else? He wrote like you do.

Subject: Your site is an insult and an assault!
From: Anonymous <anonymous@anonymizer.com>
Date sent: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 09:06 -0700

Was searching medical stuff on the web and accidentally clicked on your site.

I am disturbed by the content and tone of your site. My reaction to it is similar to that when I inadvertantly stumble upon a hate or porn site. I think, though, your's is worse. It seems you prey upon the consumer and the provider in an unjust way and decidedly prejudicial fashion.

I am writing your service provider and your government. I think what you do, and likely who you are, is criminal.

Still no action … (30/6/2000)
It has been weeks now, and nobody has come forward to accept the Cancer 100 Challenge. Come on, it can't be that hard for some of you cancer curers out there to find a hundred cured patients, and the Nobel Prizes for 2000 haven't been decided yet. Unless you can't do it, of course. Cure cancer, I mean.