This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Welcome to the world's leading forum on Multiple Sclerosis research, support, and knowledge. For over 10 years, This is MS has provided an unbiased community dedicated to Multiple Sclerosis patients, caregivers, and affected loved ones.
It is currently Tue May 21, 2013 7:19 pm


All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:35 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 208
Perhaps the way to proceed is to forget about CCSVI as an issue related to MS and just treat it as a vascular problem. Haake said in Hamilton that doctors who find blockages in veins need to treat the blockages. So even our pro-CCSVI doctors are thinking outside the box.

So let's deal with CCSVI -- for now -- as a vascular problem. That will provide treatment for those who need it. And it may turn out that the vast majority of people who need it just happen to have MS. This gives us a mechanism for getting treatment while providing material for an on-going study of its relationship to MS.

Unlike an earlier post here, there is a big difference between how veins and arteries work. Veins are, among other things, more elastic. That alone is one reason to be concerned about stents that may migrate. This also makes angioplasty preferable because it is less invasive.

Rosegirl


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 2:47 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 481
Location: Italy
Rosegirl, you hit the nail! This is what I'm currently doing in Italy.

Just go in hospital for an angiological visit for a jugular valve problem...no words on link to MS (although think when went to check appointment and said the word "jugular" to have discovered a smile on their face...but that's positive! ). Decided at last neuro-visit: no words to my neurologist on my seperate medical problem and appointment :wink: (in same hospital, haha!).

And lets see what the vascular specialists will say and think to know how to treat it then. Maybe they only repeat the doppler (I was told they will), and might say cannot do more for now, or maybe not...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:20 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:00 pm
Posts: 412
Steinman would like to go directly to a human trial to test his proposal, but there are practical difficulties. "Who's going to pay for it?" he asked. A standard proof-of-concept study with about 200 patients would cost in the vicinity of $20 million. ACE inhibitors are as inexpensive as any prescription drug at this time, so pharmaceutical companies won't see any profits from financing a study, he said.
Quote:

True for drug trials, way off for medical device trials, and way way off for diagnostic trial. no need to secure experimental drugs of high quality in small amounts, treat and follow patients, usually for years, and all those other factors that make the drug trials so infernally expensive. The Buffalo trial was 500 patients, took place in three months (!!!) and cost a total of ... I am not sure but I think the whole larger trial is 3 million? (Someone corrrect me on this.) And that is a thousand patients.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:11 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 4:00 pm
Posts: 126
Location: Greece
Wichita wrote:
Does anyone have a link to the article that Ashton Embry is refuting, entitled "Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency and Multiple Sclerosis (Khan et al, 2010, Annals of Neurology)"?

A preprint of the paper can be found here:
http://www.konkretia.net/pdf/Neuro_Critique.pdf


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Annals of Neurology (what the neuros are reading)

Cece

6

1241

Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:57 am

CCSVIhusband View the latest post

This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Another negative study in Annals of Neurology

[ Go to pageGo to page: 1, 2, 3 ]

Mathd

31

4484

Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:58 am

sou View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Dr. Zamboni's letter published in the Annals of Neurology

[ Go to pageGo to page: 1, 2 ]

cheerleader

23

3180

Wed Nov 24, 2010 10:04 pm

ms2009 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Another negative study in Annals of Neurology (part 2)

patientx

0

708

Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:27 am

patientx View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. ANNALS of Neurology, Letter to the Editor, Avruscio G., MD

gigi26970

13

2330

Tue Jun 21, 2011 2:07 pm

MrSuccess View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: