Given about 25% of healthy controls had CCSVI and about 40% of those with MS did not have CCSVI, CCSVI cannot be seen as the sole primary cause of MS.
From: Bill Meikle
Date: 2/14/2010 10:53:10 AM
Subject: cdms and cis numbers...
So the CBC reporter compared the rates for CIS subjects to "those with more advanced symptoms of the disease".
would that be CIS vs CDMS?
marcstck wrote:I don't understand how the 80% number for CDMS holds up mathematically given the rest of the study numbers.
If CIS patients did indeed display CCSVI 38% of the time, and the combination of CDMS and CIS cases displayed CCSVI approximately 56% of the time, then the 80% CDMS number would only hold up mathematically if the tested CDMS and CIS populations were equal in number.
Instead, we know that the CDMS:CIS ratio was more than 4:1. Given that ratio, the CIS incidence of CCSVI it would have to be much lower, somewhere in the neighborhood of 8%, to make an 80% number for the clinically definite multiple sclerosis population stand up mathematically.
Am I missing something?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users