JO ANN,
I’m sorry that I can’t help you to find others. I can’t imagine what you are going through. It must be so terrifying and frustrating.
Regardless of the opinions of others regarding any given treatment, I certainly can’t blame you for searching out others in similar shoes.
All the best to you.
oddly enough www.burzynski.com is a hosting service. emails and urls available there.
Morkster
Legal Notice: Receipt of this message constitutes your unconditional acceptance of agreement with all terms, conditions, conclusions and opinions, either expressed or implied, as interpreted by the author without further clarification. Use of any information contained herein [inclusive of any and all attachments] or omitted in part or in whole from the actual message is strictly prohibited and will be subject to collection of significant financial damages.
Irishman,
Your point about the placement of the OP is made and accepted. Mods move threads all the time…easy enough mistake to make…simple to fix…no biggie.
Your challenge of the accuracy of the statements in the OP very well may be factually correct. The Fact Gods are probably smiling on you.
But when I read the OP, what I came away with as being the essence of her message is found in these bits of her post:
[quote]
I am looking for other women, like myself
I need help NOW!
…time is wasting
[quote]
And it didn’t seem appropriate to me to launch into a factual lecture. Kicking people with facts when they are down probably helps as much as kicking them with your foot.
…my last words on the topic…
// hoo boy. jumping in the pool with the big guys for the first time. “We, who are about to be barbequed, salute you.” 
//
sorry, but as a female, and one with a family history featuring cancer to keep an eye on, i ** still ** side with ** Irishman ** et al. my reading of that OP sent off my hoax/rant/unsupported-weirdness radar all over the board. Cancer-based economy??? what in the name of all that is holy is * THAT??? * why wild accusations against only ** women ** officials? [semi-tongue-in-cheek Feminist mode] when did * women * take over the job of oppressing females that men have so ably performed for millenia? (and, from that standpoint, isn’t this automatically A Good Thing?) 
[/mock Feminist mode]
i’m sorry, but the whole thing came across as somebody’s half-assed attempt at demagoguery, pleas for support or no.
ok, done. if you must flame, at least don’t use a cheap basting brush with the sauce.
next one who says “Fates a bitch” gets whacked with my measuring stick.
No sweat, no flaming, love your sig, welcome!
“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen
Krispy Original said:
Well, most of us already know how you feel about facts, KO, so it’s no surprise that you’re against them. The only thing that’s surprising is that anybody at all still takes you seriously…
–
“The best medicine for misery is neither myth nor miracle, but naked truth.”
…Yeah, and it really blows your mind too…doesn’t it David?..but I’m not at all surprised that I’m taken seriously…perhaps I’m much more wise in ways that you yourself could stand to learn from…
…life isn’t all about the facts David, my young understudy… 
“Understudy”? Or “apprentice”? Or am I in a different movie? “I’ve got you now, Obi-Wan…”
“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen
Eagles may soar free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines.
Wow! I am flabbergasted at the intensity of comments that my message evoked from you. It is amazing that after all the eloquent skepticism and alarmist rhetoric none of us have any real facts. Allow me to make an observation. Apparently, this board is worthless since many of you expressed doubt that I am for real in my comments. I tripped onto this site quite by accident and decided to express my situation for the FIRST TIME on the internet. My intentions are obviously far beyond the scope and capabilities of this site. Some of you spent a considerable about of effort to discredit my opinions. Let me tell you that my comments came from my heart and my own personal experiences over the last 4 years. My comments are not the result of things that I read or the opinions of other people…professional or other wise. I spent my time travelling this country looking for the “truth” in this country because MY LIFE depended on it. I met people from all over the world who are also searching for lifesaving answers in every way possible. I have met and spoken to people who have followed their “INNER VOICE” and survived many life-threatening illness. I don’t have any vested interest in Dr. Burzynski…only the possibility of equal access to what I MIGHT DETERMINE, as my best hope for cure. Why is that so threatening to so many of you? Don’t I even have the right to express my viewpoint without being labeled so viciously. I suspect I stubbled into this message board for a reason although I received nothing of immediate value that I can recall. I appreciate any sincere comments that were offered. WERE THERE ANY? I don’t feel the need to DEFEND any of my feelings or my comments. Although there is a plethora of weakness in your critiques. I’m sorry if I frightened any of you with my candor. I am an intelligent, strong, and blessed woman who has every right to make my own decisions. I’m sorry if I disrupted your comfortable position of silencing people who have a “mind of their own”. For those of you who care, I will offer the fact that I am working with some well qualified and open-minded ocologists right now. Thank God there is some real LIGHT at the end of the tunnel. I send love and light to all. I will respond personally to anyone who has any quesstions or information that could be helpful. Obviously, this message board holds no value for me. Namaste!
Forgive my typographical errors. I always get nervous when I address such a formidable crowd.
Jo Ann Esterly wrote:
Funny, I was flabbergasted at the intensity of charges you made towards those that have little vested interest in letting a “slaughter” take place and charges that those in control of some dark “American breast cancer economy” have been actively suppressing some amazing breakthrough. All this was presented by you without a shred of evidence to back it up.
I agree that your initial posting is a bit thin on facts (lots of emotion and unsupported accusations), but I believe that I presented a pretty level headed overview of why one should be wary of your claims about a conspiracy against women with breast cancer (how much public research funding does breast cancer receive versus all other cancers again?) and why one should be wary of claims made by Burzynski. Another person presented a few enlightening links from the American Cancer Society and Health Care Reality Check, but then I suppose a case could be made that they are complicit in the “breast cancer economy”, right?
I wonder why we have set up standards for the practice of medicine in this country? I think that the best argument for them is to protect those that are not experts in medicine from being diagnosed and treated by people who have no business diagnosing or treating. The weight of real, peer-reviewed evidence suggests that Burzynski is one of those folks who should not be treating patients willy-nilly for cancer with his anti-neoplastins. I am not convinced that Burzynski rises to the level of, say, Hulda Clark and her “zapper”, at least Burzynski has a medical degree and valid medical credentials. However, I do think that there are good reasons for strict controls being placed on Dr. Burzynski until he can demonstrate that his claims are based in reality and tested in the same manner as any other drug therapy for cancer. Unless we hold medical doctors to basic standards of practice, we risk a bigger “slaughter” (your words) of scientifically unsavvy and desperate consumers who fall under the spell of the latest “Gallileo”.
Cop out…Someone who feels that they have facts on their side has no problems defending their comments, why else would one want to post on this UBB. I have seen no claim that you make concerning the persecution of Burzynski to be defendable any way. If you think that I, or anyone else, have weaknesses in their critique, you owe it to the readers of this thread to point them out. Unfortunately, the most emotion and weakness is emanating from the original post in this thread and so the follow up posts were of the “shooting fish in a barrel” type or the general background info type that added facts to the discussion.
A final comment:
It is unfortunate that posters would doubt your illness. I think that most would point this Burzynski info out as a matter of compassion, I know that was the vein in which I meant to cast a bit of doubt on Burzynski and your charges. I think it is rather uncompassionate to allow, without at least some comment, a person to bypass effective treatments that are well-worn and tested for experimental procedures that have little supporting information and a “researcher” that is unwilling to let experts effectively review his data-and the few reasonably well documented “success stories” that can be followed up on are either dead from their disease or about to die from it. I have little problems with a person seeking out additional help after other options have been exhausted, however, it is a fact of life that there are unscrupulous practitioners that see $$$ when a person is desperate and wants to have hope and I have a big problem with those that leave their “patients” not only penniless, but dead from their “treatments”.
Jon
I wish to hereby tender my sincere apologies to Jo Ann Esterly for publicly expressing my doubts that she was a real person.
I am sorry if I hurt your feelings.
“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen
I, on the other hand must now acknowledge that my sincere offer of truth enfolded with love was neither desired, nor accepted. To those on the board whom I criticized for the absence of compassion, I admit that your suspicions seem to have been justified, Jo Ann is not able to hear doubts directed at her desires, even when they are cautiously extended as a wish for help, and support.
It shall not change the way I respond to future posters, since I still find it more desirable to have had an offer of love spurned, than to have withheld it. I have lost nothing, and Jo Ann has only lost what she will not have, and does not want.
Shall we move on, friends, and find a less shielded corner into which to bring our light?
Tris
Imagine my signature begins five spaces to the right of center.
“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen
Dear Jo Ann,
I suppose the strident tone and wild accusations distracted my attention. I apologize if my response overlooked the human element.
I sympathize with your condition. I can only imagine what you are going through. I hope that you are having success with the treatments available.
My thoughts, however, keep going back to your approach. The net is full of crazy stuff. There are many loonies out there passing off all sorts of crap, some with good intentions, some not. I need only direct you to Snopes to show you the kind of things that are sent around. There are many messages that come to bulletin boards and mailed through email that cry out just like you did. For instance, there is the famous “Women of the Taliban” email petition. It was started by a concerned woman who sent an email to all her friends asking people to sign the petition, forward it to all their friends, and funnel the responses back to her. This was a well-intentioned act that did not appreciate just how much traffic it would generate, nor the worthlessness of the effort. The volume of responses crashed her server, forced the cancellation of that email address, and led to the site generating an automated response to explain just how inappropriate it was. That type of thing is not uncommon.
Similarly, there are many emails going around requesting you to forward the email to all your friends so some dying kid in the hospital has their name spread around the globe. These are fake, and pointless. Then there are the ones claiming some rich person/corporation will donate money to health care projects based on email signatures or forwards and the like. Again, all false.
There are people selling all manner of worthless and potentially dangerous products via email and bulletin boards. Then there are the ones who claim to be selling products, but are really trying to sucker investers to bilk their money and the disappear.
Then there are the loons trying to promote their general craziness - from alien abductions, to JFK conspiracies, to flat earth, to NASA conspiracies to fake the moon landings and hide that a giant asteroid is coming to destroy us right now.
With all the craziness, paranoia, clamoring for attention, unfounded accusations, etc, is it any wonder that we who have been around on the net learn to look for warning signs? Well, your post exhibited a fair number of those warning signs. Even avoiding the board specific problems (wrong forum, no link to column), there were the issues mentioned by jkeller. Those things are alert signals to many of us that what is being posted is “full of crap”, and the poster is in many cases not some caring individual, but a “spammer” or a “troll” - someone blanket posting their “message” to drum up responses, or someone purposely posting annoying/misleading/ frustrating things to stir up controversy and garner attention.
And then you post your response. It pretty much confirms our assumptions.
Please take this as a lesson for internet ettiquette. No one likes the “boy who cried wolf”. Alarmist, conspiracy laden, unfounded accusations don’t get positive attention.
If you are sincerely wondering, try asking your questions without the invective. Or back up your accusations with references.
And when you post, expect there to be a percentage of people who disagree with you, and take issue against unfounded claims. Around here, that percentage will be high.
Now a few direct responses.
Originally posted by Jo Ann Esterly:
First, you did not ask for facts. Second, I believe jkeller and myself did provide facts. They weren’t in agreement with you, but they were provided.
See my explanation above for why would would have reason to doubt you. Though in fairness, I didn’t say I doubted your identity or your motivations, only your accusations and declarations.
Hardly. Rather, your methods are improper and your tone does not build sympathy.
Sincerity of belief does not mean accuracy.
See above.
Well, you said some rather rude things about certain women politicians. Of course you don’t have to defend anything, but realize that other people will take issue with your statements, and respond accordingly. Refusal to defend your remarks does not reflect well on you.
Please point them out so we can correct ourselves.
Your candor did not frighten. Aggravate, annoy, puzzle, confuse, intrigue, bemuse, and frazzle, but not frighten. Your decisions are yours to make - but expressing a position and not supporting it will not “win friends”.
We know many people with a “mind of their own”. Phaedrus comes to mind. Or FORMERAGENT. There’s a list. It’s not good company.
I am happy for you that you are seeing positive results.
[cloying]We try.[/cloying]
Seriou
Irishman, you rule.
“The analyst went barking up the wrong tree, of course. I never should have mentioned unicorns to a Freudian.” – Dottie (“Jumpers” by Tom Stoppard)
This may have been inspired by Cecil’s column, but was never really a discussion about it. So I’m moving it to Great Debates.
Jill
[test post]
Well, sadly, Jo Ann didn’t return to this thread. She did send me an email, and I suggested she post it here.
I have to wonder if she got lost when the thread moved. 
And I even made special dispensation to follow the thread to ::ugh:: GD. Only because I felt some responsibility for it getting moved, what with my constant prodding of Jill and all.
Oh well.