Wayne Dolcefino

Background

Interesting day.

Information was buzzing around the blogosphere about a man called Wayne Dolcefino. Details had emerged about him having contacted a family, of which one member had been a patient at The Burzyński Clinic.

In the email he makes the following statement:

“Dr. Burzynskis office has retained my company to assist them in establishing, how should I say it, more mature conversations with people who have issues with the clinic.”

This is a pretty bold claim. The family in question had raised some legitimate concerns about treatment and cost. In fact, they feel that they were completely deceived when it came to the cost of ongoing treatment. He went on to say:

“First, I am glad from the last posts I see that your husband is doing well. I hope that is still the case. If there any questions I can answer going forward please feel free to e mail me.”

This certainly appears to be the language of a man who’s working for the Burzyński Clinic. I’d also noticed, with a bit of digging, a few photos of Wayne at this years Burzyński Clinic Christmas Party. This doesn’t confirm a connection but it does show a familiarity with the clinic and the Burzyński’s. Nor does the fact they have both been represented by the same legal team in the past. When you live in the same City, these things happen.

For some more detail, I highly recommend the words of Keir Liddle, in his recent guest post on Josephine Jones’ blog.

A polite email and an unusual reply

Well, I had this guys email address, so I thought, I’ll just email him. So, I did. I was polite and give it the ‘soft sell’. I wanted to talk to this guy, not piss him off with my first contact. Here’s my email:

On Feb 12, 2013, at 11:48 AM, David James wrote:

Dear Mr. Dolcefino,

I hope this email finds you well.

It has been brought to my attention, over the past day or so, that you have taken instructions from The Burzyński Clinic to represent them in a media and pubic relations capacity.

I would be interested in hearing from you on this matter. Whether you can indeed confirm that this is the case. Or, if you have been asked to represent the Clinic in any other capacity.

I have followed Dr. Burzyński’s clinical work closely for some time now. While I am still to be convinced that his facility and treatment processes are fully efficacious, I look forward to him publishing Phase II trail data soon, that should end this debate, one and for all.

Kind Regards,

David James

Well, a few hours passed. Then just when I was thinking Wayne wasn’t going to get back to me. I got a very short reply. No words, just a mobile (cell) phone number:

From: Wayne Dolcefino
Date: 12 February 2013 18:42:12 GMT
To: David James
Subject: Re: The Burzyński Clinic

713XXXXXXX

Sent from my iPhone

So I checked online and sure enough, it was a Huston area telephone number. Good start! I emailed a couple of folks and kindly was given a few possible questions to ask. Pitching the questions was all going to be very dependant on how friendly or adversarial he was going to be.

Summary of the call

I know people are interested in this call. I’m currently recovering from an illness that’s kept me off work, so I haven’t go the energy to get every single detail covered. I’ll go over my notes again later and update if I’ve missed anything interesting. Here’s probably the main highlights:

1. He has worked for the clinic. Speaking to patients in person and on the phone. He’s also made some videos of these interviews for the clinic.

2. He confirmed that the FDA are at the clinic. He says this is standard procedure when a trial ends.

3. That the trials have ended.

4. The clinic are getting ready to publish.

5. He has heard of the Merritts and if asked to, he would speak to them. When I asked him about their requested refund, he said he’d read about it and that “refunds were a funny thing”. He didn’t say if he’d already been in contact with them.

6. Despite saying he would speak to the Merritts if asked, he didn’t work for the clinic at the moment.

7. He was aware of Marc Stephens past behaviour. He said, “he didn’t muddy the water, he peed in it”. He went on to say, if asked to speak to bloggers, he would do so in a polite and respectful manner.

8. When I asked him about the legitimate questions that Burzyński needed to answer, he said that the cost and trial data were legitimate questions.

Like I said, I’ll have more time to review my notes another time. Hope this is of some interest.

You may also like...

6 Responses

  1. Lisa says:

    It’s so nice to hear that his trial is ended…. And we may finally get the answers to the questions of wheither or not he is a gift to society or actually a very bad curse!

    I see it this way…..
    “If” Burzynski doesn’t have this fabulous cure for cancer as he claims, and is charging astronomical fees for fake treatment….. Then he is EVIL.
    “If” Burzynski does truly have the long awaited cure for cancer… And is charging astronomical fees for it through clinical trials…… And NOT sharing it with the world for fear of losing profits….. Then he is EVIL.
    This way or that….. Does it matter? EVIL.

  2. Lawrence says:

    Perhaps the FDA is there to get Old Stan to finally “put up or shut up” regarding his treatment program (i.e. either publish or perish).

    We’ll see what happens over the next few months – these things never die easy.

  3. frozenwarnings says:

    FDA visits are a standard procedure at the end of a trial? That would be very, very weird considering the vast number of clinical trials that are actually performed. Certainly in the UK we don’t get visits from regulators at the end of a clinical trial. From what I’ve read on FDA Audits, they are run pretty much exactly the same as our MHRA inspections and last the same amount of time i.e. 2-5 days, not 2 months.
    Odd also that Burzynski appears to have told his patients that he can’t take any adult or child patients. Note, not “we’re finished the trials”.
    Not sounding very convincing so far.

  1. February 13, 2013

    […] Here are the main highlights of the conversation, taken from the East England Skeptical Society’s SKEPT!CAL blog (here): […]

  2. February 17, 2013

    […] Wayne Dolcefino David James, SKEPT!CAL blog, East England Skeptical Society, 13/02/13 […]

  3. February 18, 2013

    […] to in my email response, which is also below. If your just catching up, it’s worth reading this and this for a bit more […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>