Cece wrote:Let's see...by self-selecting bias I meant something like this example...
I think the reason we are here is because the theory resonates with our own personal experiences and symptoms. Hypoxic events just before relapses, anyone? (I was hiking on Mt. Haleakala, on my honeymoon.) Cold feet of the literal sort? It's a self-selecting bias but it works in our favor. CCSVI can be tested for and treated.
Simone, there are blurry shades of gray, or so it seems, when it comes to interpreting some of the imaging. A missing jugular is obvious, but there are people with a small pinching of the vein or a narrowing throughout, and it's not as clearcut...so some of that gets interpreted by the pro-CCSVI doctor as being CCSVI and worthy of treatment and the neg-CCSVI doctor as being nothing. That is where the bias is.
simone wrote:Cece & Ozarkcanoer,
I understand about blinded trials but what I don't get is, if a jugular vein etc.....
is missing in anyone, isn't that a a problem?
Cece wrote:I've mentioned to my husband how stunning it is, to see some of the imagery being posted by people here who've had the MRV done and are missing a jugular or have a bone occlusion or a narrowing. It seems like the percentages of people here having CCSVI are higher than what Buffalo found. My husband suggested that it could be a self-selection bias. The CCSVI theory made sense to me and fit with my symptoms, so I stuck around...for those for whom it's not as good a fit, they don't stick around.
I think docs need to see these sites too, to see that at least there are many patients who like them still believe in objective evidence.
Users browsing this forum: ALA