Skip to main content

Why?

Malignant Melanoma

Posted in

In Austria approx. 1,280 people are diagnosed with malignant melanoma per year and around 280 die of it.
Worldwide approximately 160,000 people are diagnosed with malignant melanoma per year and around 40,000 die of it.

Malignant melanoma, also known as black skin cancer, is a highly malignant tumour of the pigment cells. It tends to spread metastases early via the lymph and blood streams and is the most frequent fatal skin disease with a fast rising number of new diagnoses throughout the world. (Source Wikipedia)

In Austria around 10-15 new melanoma diagnoses per 100,000 of the population are made each year, whereby incidence has strongly risen over recent decades. In countries with stronger sunlight such as Australia incidence of skin melanoma is considerably more frequent than in Austria (up to 40 new diagnoses per year per 100,000 of the population).

The best opportunity for therapy is still early recognition and surgical removal of the tumour. However, when metastasis has already occurred all forms of chemotherapy are helpless, which was also confirmed with disappointment at the 6th World Congress on Melanoma in Vancouver in September 2005.

In 1983, based on his experience with Ukrain in the treatment of patients with metastasising melanoma, Prof. Dr. Peter Wodniansky, a renowned melanoma specialist in Austria, observed that this medicament can save patients' lives. It was therefore no wonder that he felt obliged to inform the Ministry of Health. (Link) He reported his good results and requested that the potential of Ukrain should be investigated in a clinical study. Unfortunately this has not happened until now even though the Pharmaceutical Committee of the Ministry of Health approved a clinical study with melanoma patients.

In December 2005, after participating at the 6th World Congress on Melanoma, Dr. Nowicky requested the renowned Prof. Hubert Pehamberger to initiated a clinical study of Ukrain with malignant melanoma. This also remained unsuccessful. (Link)

Many melanoma patients who already had metastases were aware that they could not benefit from conventional chemotherapy. Those patients, some of whom were already regarded as hopeless cases on account of multiple metastases, who decided for Ukrain therapy have lived for years without recurrences.

Why has there been no reaction on the part of research and the Austrian Ministry of Health to such remarkable successes?

Xeroderma Pigmentosum

Posted in

Vienna, 05.03.2009

Xeroderma pigmentosum is a rare skin disease. It is due to a genetic defect. DNA repair enzymes are mutated and can no longer repair the DNA changes caused by UV rays. The result is malignant forms of skin cancer (e.g. melanomas) which cause the death of most of the children affected during their first decade of their lives.

Xeroderma pigmentosum is a very rare disease; with regional differences incidence is between 1:40,000 (Japan) and 1,250,000 (USA); in the USA there are around 250 people with documented XP, in Germany approximately 50, most of them are children.

There are almost no therapy options. Patients are advised to avoid any form of exposure to the sun. NASA has developed special suits for those affected which are intended to protect patients from the dangerous sunlight.

Patient S.S. was diagnosed with xeroderma pigmentosum at the age of 10 months. Despite the greatest possible avoidance of sunlight at the age of 8 a squamous carcinoma of the nose developed as well as multiple melanomas in the face and body area. Three cycles of chemotherapy (Cyclophosphamide, Vincristine and Vinblastine) unfortunately brought no success and tumour size was not reduced. On the contrary, the skin tumours increased in size.  

The child's parents decided upon therapy with Ukrain. The result was a complete regression of the tumours (see photos). The situation with xeroderma lesions improved over the whole body.

In October 2003 Dr. Nowicky wrote letters to the chairman of the Bundesfachgruppe Dermatologie (Federal Specialist Group for Dermatology), the board of the Arbeitsgruppe Melanom und Dermatologische Onkologie (Work Group for Melanoma and Dermatological Oncology) of the Österreichische Gesellschaft für Dermatologie und Venerologie (Austrian Society for Dermatology and Venereology) and the president of the ÖGDV Wiener Medizinische Akademie für Ärztliche Fortbildung und Forschung (Vienna Academy of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research) in which he pointed out to the noted doctors the successful treatment of xeroderma pigmentosum with Ukrain. In the letters Dr. Nowicky also asked them to "pass on the information to patients or their family members". In their joint reply the professors pointed out that "the Österreichische Gesellschaft für Dermatologie und Venerologie keeps no register of these extremely rare patients" and that "a recommendation for Ukrain ... is not possible for this indication".

Why, despite repeated requests, does the government of Austria not arrange for a clinical study to be carried out to test the efficacy of this medicament with xeroderma pigmentosum?

With best regards,
Dr. Wassil Nowicky

Ewing's sarcoma

Posted in

Vienna, 19.02.2009

Austrian civil servants should feel obliged to Austrian tax payers to answer the following questions:

Ewing's sarcoma occurs as a result of tumour growth that comes from the connective tissue cells of bone marrow. With an incidence of 3 cases per 1 million people it is a rare disease. Ewing's sarcoma can appear on the whole skeleton but nevertheless occurs most frequently on the legs, pelvic bone, bladebone and ribs. As a rule children get the disease when aged between 10 and 15 but children below 10 years old are also affected.

(http://www.medizinfo.de/krebs/kinder/knochensarkome.shtml). 

A 9 year-old girl from Poland was diagnosed with Ewing's sarcoma. The girl received chemotherapy and radiotherapy but the tumour growth could not be stopped. The girl was declared to have exhausted all possible forms of treatment (i.e. had been given up by mainstream medicine) and was sent home with hopeless prospects.

The parents took their daughter to Vienna to St. Anna Children's Hospital because they hoped to receive better medical treatment.

The doctors carried out new examinations and had to declare that they too could not help her. The complete repertoire of mainstream medicine was used up but the tumour growth continued.

At this point her parents heard about Ukrain by chance and contacted Dr. Wassil Nowicky. On 21 January 1984 treatment with Ukrain was begun (Lohninger et al, 1992).

After 6 months of treatment with Ukrain the girl was examined again at St. Anna Children's Hospital and to the great astonishment of the doctors not only had the tumour growth been stopped but even better, the tumour had become smaller. However, there was still no interest in Ukrain.

Treatment with Ukrain was continued and every six months the progression of the disease was checked at St. Anna Children's Hospital at the instigation of Dr. Nowicky. In this way Dr. Nowicky wanted to arouse the interest of doctors in Ukrain (unfortunately to no avail).

Gradually the tumour disappeared completely and at an X-ray examination on 31 October 1990 it was seen that even the bone which had been eaten away had regenerated (Ukrain: results of the preclinical and clinical studies). Despite this the interest of doctors was not aroused and they completely ignored the fact that the girl had been treated with Ukrain.

In vitro studies (studies on cell cultures) by scientists at the University of Tübingen have demonstrated the effectiveness of Ukrain with Ewing's sarcoma. These studies and clinical successes, such as with Dr. Aschhoff, were repeatedly submitted to the Ministry of Health. At Dr. Aschhoff's clinic "Cancer patients were treated whose disease had already been treated with all mainstream medicine therapy protocols and as a result of relapse and/or progress of the disease no further mode of therapy was available for them and who had thus "exhausted all modes of therapy". (Aschhoff 2000) And with these patients who had been given up by mainstream medicine with the help of Ukrain Dr. Aschhoff achieved a full remission rate of 50% for Ewing's sarcoma.

Why, despite everything, was an investigation of the medicament never instigated and this opportunity not used?

Why was there no interest in Ukrain despite these sensational successes in hopeless cases?

Why is Ukrain not recommended in those cases where mainstream medicine has failed?

"There can be nothing worse for parents than to have to accept the diagnosis of cancer for their child and then watch how this child is subjected to the physical as well as psychological strains of chemotherapy... Can one continue to look on and do nothing while child and adult cancer patients who have been given up by traditional medicine are denied a very promising form of treatment?" Preface to the book Who's Afraid of Ukrain? The struggle for an alternative cancer drug by Dr. Eleonore Thun-Hohenstein.

Polish scientists were surprised by this success and wanted to clarify whether it was chance or the logical consequence of the efficacy of the preparation.

In the meantime 71 Polish scientists have published 70 specialist publications on Ukrain (Publications) and made 71 presentations on the subject at 31 congresses (Congresses). The research studies have included all fields – chemistry, cell-line studies, animal tests, toxicology and clinical studies. Ukrain is still an important research subject for Polish scientists.

However, in Austria, Ukrain's country of origin, the preparation has been totally ignored. Because of the disparaging evaluation parents are persuaded to refrain from using the preparation (The story from Dr. Mikael Stenborg, Copenhagen, Denmark).

At the time when the Polish girl was treated, around 150 case histories of successful treatment with Ukrain were submitted to the Austrian Ministry of Health. In the case of the Polish girl the examinations at St. Anna Children's Hospital were repeated especially to draw the attention of medical circles to the preparation Ukrain to enable research to be carried out on it in Austria and made available to other sick children.

All to no avail. On the contrary, "The accusation was even made by civil servants against [the inventor] that he had manipulated clinical studies... Because of the decades-long, unsuccessful procedure at the Ministry of Health they see [him] as something like a continual 'cantankerous trouble-maker'." (e-mail Dr. C. Hauer)

Why have Austrian civil servants at the Ministry of Health taken no notice of this case and why have none of them instigated the investigation of the preparation where the remission rate for patients with Ewing's sarcoma who have exhausted all modes of therapy is 50% and the fact that it is not a risk to health has not only been demonstrated by eastern European scientists but also by the Austrian Research Centre Seibersdorf? With such therapeutic successes and in accordance with the law in force at the time the preparation should be promptly approved because it is produced from two substances which were already approved (Letter to Dr. Hauer). Why was no attention drawn to this preparation and why were warnings even given against it? In whose interest?

The Austrian civil servants involved owe the answer to this question to Austrian tax payers. Who did the individual civil servants want to serve with this disregard?

With best regards,
Dr. Wassil Nowicky

Why?

Posted in

Vienna, 05.02.2009

In Austria approx. 36,500 people per year are diagnosed with cancer and around 19,200 die of it.

Worldwide aprrox. 10.8 million people per year are diagnosed with cancer and around 6.7 million die of it.

Ukrain is registered in many countries such as Ukraine, Mexico, the United Arab Emirates, Georgia etc. and has Orphan Drug Status in Australia and USA.

krain's efficacy and the fact that it is not a health hazard has been documented in 258 specialist publications and it has been presented at 220 congresses. In 1999 a symposium was dedicated to Ukrain in Sydney as part of the 20th International Congress of Chemotherapy. All of this makes it possible for doctors to prescribe the medicament for patients.

Why is the Österreichische Apothekerverband (Austrian Association of Chemists) preventing the dispensing of Ukrain in Austrian pharmacies? According to § 8 Arzneimittelgesetz Abs.2 (Austrian Medicines Law) a medicament which is not registered should also be available "when a doctor in Austria who is authorised to practice medicine independently certifies that the proprietary medicinal product is urgently needed to prevent a threat to life or a serious impairment to health and, according to scientific knowledge, this result can probably not be achieved with a registered and available proprietary medicinal product".

Why?

Posted in

Vienna, 29.01.2009

In 1976, in Austria as its country of origin, I made an application for the approval of the medicament Ukrain for the treatment of patients who had exhausted all other modes of therapy. By 1986 I had submitted more than 450 medical histories to the ministry as proof that Ukrain was effective and not a health hazard (www.ukrain.ua).

It has been proved in studies that Ukrain is effective against cancer, and at the same time that it is 300 times less toxic than its starting substances. According to the laws passed in 1947, which were in force in 1976, Ukrain should have been approved immediately because it is made up of two approved starting substances but has an advantage over both of them.

In 1993 the Bristol Meyers Squibb company applied for the approval of the product Taxol and this was granted within a few weeks although only 17 case histories were submitted. Why did Austria grant approval as the first country in the world although it was not even the country of origin of Taxol, but refuse to grant approval to Ukrain?

The Austrian constitution guarantees equal rights to all citizens. In my case, why has the right to equal treatment to which I am entitled been violated?

Syndicate content