Skip to main content

Letter to Procurator General’s Office

Procurator General’s Office
Schmerlingplatz 11
A-1016 Vienna

30.07.2012

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Ministry of Health officials are using all possible means to act against my anti-cancer preparation Ukrain (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/1998-01-08-brief.pdf). A reason given for this is that no effect can be observed despite the fact that so far 260 scientists from 24 countries in 60 universities and research institutes have taken part in research work on Ukrain. Their studies have been described in 281 specialist scientific articles, of which more than 170 have been published on PubMed alone. These can be found at www.pubmed.org.

Further evidence was provided in a study at the University of Miami, USA (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/sotomayor_1992.pdf). Based on the data obtained in this study the therapeutic index of Ukrain was calculated to be 1250 (http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/drug-profiles/glossary/de). Thanks to its very high therapeutic index Ukrain does not cause necrosis with intramuscular injection, which was demonstrated in a Phase I study with healthy volunteers ((http://www.ukrin.com/docs/Danysz_1992.pdf).

This is exceptionally high for a cancer drug. The therapeutic index (TI) is the ratio between the toxic and the therapeutic dose and reflects the safety of a medicine. The therapeutic index of conventional cytostatic drugs, which include Thiotepa, is in the range of 1.4 – 1.8, meaning that an overdose can have fatal consequences. Due to its very high TI of 1,250 there is no danger of an overdose when using Ukrain.

It was a trail-blazing discovery. As can be seen, many aspects of the effect of Ukrain on various elements of cancer cells and healthy cells have so far been studied. Nevertheless it is possible that these effects are only consequences of still unknown processes that are triggered by Ukrain in cancer cells but not in healthy cells ((http://www.ukrin.com/docs/Wirksamkeit2.pdf).

Chemotherapy is evidently not classified as unsafe although it has already been proved that more and more people die as a result of chemotherapy than the actual disease of cancer (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/chemotherapie-5-artikel.pdf). This is understandable because chemotherapeutic drugs have a therapeutic index of 1.4 – 1.8, which means that a double dose can already cause a patient to die. As mentioned above, in contrast Ukrain has a therapeutic index of 1,250 which is why there is no risk of an overdose and why it should therefore be classified as safe.

Despite me asking on what studies officials have based their claims (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2012-07-19-3-briefe-an-bundekanzler-ages-bundesministerium-gesundheit.pdf), I have received no information so far.

The question is whether any studies have been carried out at all, what methods were used and what were the scientific findings. Ukrain has been used since 1976 with good results and without risk to patients and there have been no signs that it has been harmful to anyone (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/wodiansky2.pdf). However, the consequences of chemotherapy have not only been pointed out in the following article “Giftkur ohne Nutzen” (“Toxic Treatment with no Benefits”) in the Spiegel (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/chemotherapie-5-artikel.pdf).

Here is a brief summary:

In 1995 the completely emaciated child, Stefan Dan, was brought to me with a tumour after officials had recommended his parents to have him treated with Ukrain (http://www.ukrin.com/de/taxonomy/term/16). I was horrified by Stefan’s condition and gave his parents Ukrain free of charge.

In 1996 Mr and Mrs Katic came to me with their small daughter, who could also not be helped by conventional medicine. I gave them Ukrain once again and the child developed a rash after the first administration of the preparation. An official from the Ministry of Health telephoned me immediately and threatened that I would be charged for using an unregistered medicine. The rash disappeared one day later by itself and the child continued with therapy. She is now 27 years-old and has given birth to a healthy child (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/uk7nowicki.pdf).

On 8.10.2010 and 3.2.2011, after seeing pictures of children who were beyond treatment and an appeal for donations from St. Anna Children’s Hospital (St. Anna Kinderspital, Vienna) I wrote offering either a monetary donation or Ukrain free of charge for 11 children who had been sent home to die (http://www.ukrin.com/de/taxonomy/term/18). Every year around 200 children die of cancer in Austria. (http://www.ukrin.com/docs//ich-moechte-leid-lindern.pdf). My letters have remained unanswered until now.

On 15.08.2011 I made the offer of Ukrain free of charge for 11 children to the authorities in Ukraine since the medicine is registered there. A press conference was held and several people attempted to disrupt it. They were outraged that a toxic medicine could be given to children. The disruptors brought a circular in English with them stating that the medicine is not registered in Austria (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/unterkofler-schreiben-de-en-ru.pdf).
This circular was from Mag. Unterkofler, who works for the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AGES) in Austria. The response from the Schönherr lawyer’s office based on Austrian legislation can be found here (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2011-11-17-drhauer-stellungnahme.pdf).

On 11.11.2011, when I was not in Austria, two policemen and two detectives came to my office with two officials from AGES who wanted batch samples of Ukrain without any kind of written warrant. They also wanted to see the store-room, which they were shown. They then confiscated 5,654 ampoules on the grounds that registration had been withdrawn in Ukraine (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2011-11-11-ages-niederschrift.pdf). When questioned – since my staff were not aware of this – they said that they had received the information from the Austrian embassy in Kiev (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2011-11-11-gedaechtnisprotokoll-frau-nowicky.pdf).

On 14.11.2011 there was a demonstration in front of the Austrian embassy in Kiev. The same woman who had been present at the press conference was also among the demonstrators. She showed the death certificate of her brother who had been suffering from an inoperable kidney carcinoma and apparently died eight years ago despite being treated with Ukrain. Since her brother died eight years ago it can no longer be ascertained whether he in fact took Ukrain or from what source this Ukrain came. Although the woman was asked several times to show her brother’s medical records she has so far not done so.

At the time that the ampoules were confiscated in Vienna, i.e. on 11.11.2011, registration in Ukraine was however fully valid. Only the following week did the Ukrainian Minister of Health sign a decree in which registration of Ukrain was not withdrawn but suspended (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2011-11-14-gesundheitsministerium-ukraine-einstellung-der-registrierung.pdf). Nevertheless, under Ukrainian law, such a decree must be sanctioned by the Ministry of Justice. However since the Ministry of Justice had not sanctioned the decree, which was nevertheless made public, the President of Ukraine dismissed the Minister of Health (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2012-02-14-gesundheitsminister-ukraine-gekuendigt.pdf).

On 25.7.2012 journalists in Kiev telephoned me and told me that a demonstration was again planned in front of the Austrian embassy on 26.7.2012. Journalists from two television stations were paid to carry out interviews with demonstrators. Austrian citizens were also supposed to take part in the demonstration and point out that Ukrain is not registered in Austria, its country of origin, and present official notification from the ministry stating that the effect of the medicine is questionable.

Austrian officials visited the producer of Ukrain, the German company Dycherhoff. The head of the company was not only interrogated by the criminal investigation department but she was also forbidden to continue producing Ukrain or to deliver it (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2011-11-25-mitteilung-schuehlein-ueber-aufsich...). It was pointed out that Ukrain was no longer registered in Ukraine, which was incorrect and still is. However, because Ukrain was registered in Georgia the company intended to deliver Ukrain there. However, interventions were successful in ensuring that registration was withdrawn (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2012-01-10-gesundheitsministerium-georgien-zulassung-zurueckgezogen.pdf).

The German company LAT, which carried out quality analyses for Ukrain, was forced to distance itself from working with Nowicky Pharma after a visit from Austrian officials (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2012-02-28-lat-inspektion-und-beendigung-der-zusammenarbeit.pdf).

On 17.05.2012 Ukrain was granted registration in Kosovo (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/registration-kosovo.pdf). The production company was informed so that it could supply the country. We then received notification that Dycherhoff could only deliver Ukrain if the government in which the health authorities had granted registration was notified that the German authorities regard the preparation as questionable (an Austrian health official had previously personally been in Germany at the BfArM). The German authorities obviously do not trust health officials in other countries to make the right decisions.

On 18.7.2012 I wrote to the Federal Chancellor, to the Federal Ministry of Health and also to the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AGES) asking that I be sent the documentation which forms the basis for their claim of a questionable effect. Until now I have still received no answer (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2012-07-19-3-briefe-an-bundeskanzler-ages-bundesministerium-gesundheit.pdf).

When two young medical students carried out a study with Ukrain and exhibited its results during a congress in Paris from 31.01 to 02.02.2012 (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/icact2012.pdf) the work was adjudged the best from 312 submissions. The young doctors were then questioned by AGES officials who demanded that they should distance themselves from Ukrain (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/2012-04-18-ages-askolds-vernehmungsprotokoll.pdf). After their success at ICACT the young men wanted to make a presentation in Japan and their hotel and flights were already booked. However, after being questioned by AGES, with regret they cancelled the planned presentation.

As I already informed you in previous letters, I made my first application for the registration of Ukrain in 1976 – please also see the letter from 1981 (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/1981-brief-komplett.pdf). My application has still not been dealt with by the Austrian authorities. The European Court of Human Rights found against the Republic of Austria in this matter (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/case_nowicky_austria-pdf).

According to the following article in The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/18743951) huge amounts of money are spent in search of a preparation which has a selective effect on cancer and healthy cells. Here the Austrian officials have a medicine available which is the only product with this selective effect, which has been confirmed by 12 renowned universities and institutes such as Rochester University, the University of Milan etc. (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/Wirksamkeit2.pdf - pages 36-45, http://www.ukrin.com/docs/gagliano-2012.pdf). The methods used in the tests are precisely described.

There are three cancer research institutes in Austria. If there is doubt about the efficacy of Ukrain, it should be the duty of the authorities to have the medicine appropriately tested. Every Austrian taxpayer has the right to receive the best treatment if they contract cancer.

On the basis of the facts described above, all of which I can document and for which I have also provided links, the suspicion arises that all of these activities of the officials are aimed at stopping the use of Ukrain because the more it is used the more evidence is accumulating for its positive effect (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/Bondar_1998.pdf). A retrospective randomised study (“Retrospective Analysis of Complex Treatment of Patients with Rectal Cancer”) presented at the 2nd International Conference on Drug Discovery & Therapy in Dubai from 1-4 February 2010 found that in the group of patients treated with Ukrain 75% have lived longer than 12 years, in the chemotherapy group only 45.8% (http://www.ukrin.com/docs/borota-dubai-congress2010.pdf).

As an Austrian citizen and taxpayer I request you to check whether the Austrian state health officials have acted in accordance with the law.

Yours faithfully,

 

Dr. Wassil Nowicky

Reply

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.