of course i wear a shirt with a big S on it.........my name really is sclafani
i am not doing my study to determine whether there is an association of ccsvi in patients with MS. I am comfortable with that determination already.
edited to say: I forgot what I wanted to say, which is that the problem is that there is no current treatment for CCSVI, as the crabs are only for the immune-related secondary effects...so the group that draws the no-treatment straw would still be getting no ccsvi treatment.
1eye wrote:I believe that, far from trying to control for CCSVI alone (which we will be able to do, presumeably, once we are able to clearly measure it's ill effects), we should be measuring and testing the effect of the treatments we perform on measured 'MS' symptoms.
the problem with a blinded study is how does one keep a patient in the dark about whether they are treated or not. Do we do all procedures under general anesthesia to remove the astute MSer from the equation? Unethical and dangerous). Very difficult. it will take a lot of discussion
Cece wrote:drsclafani wrote:Then I have had cases where I knew there was a jugular vein from the MRv but it was extremely difficult to get the catheter into it.
This could be evidence that MRVs are useful before the procedure for the extra information and not altogether unnecessary...a question for the research to answer, I suppose.
bluesky63 wrote:Happy Birthday, Cece! And maybe this goes with the association between MS and May birthdays, but I too am surrounded by May babies -- May 3, 14, 18, 19, 23, in the immediate family!
I am not juts getting sentimental in the thread. I have a query. Dr. Sclafani, is it too far out to think about veins/arteries from cadavers? Or is there a way to grow them from your own tissue?
1eye wrote:Placebo is NO TREATMENT. Call it what it is! (oh, sorry, that's what you *did* call it.) Use something ethical as a control, like current treatments! Then you won't have to run *that* as *another* costly trial, to prove which one is better! Unless they are statistically EXACTLY the SAME, in which case the feeble-minded unfortunate brain-damaged CCSVI victim would have to exercise personal choice, which might be beyond their ability. So the doctor would have to do it for them. And that would be a real tragedy.
Sugar pills are only good for proof (legal) of malingering, to insurance companies, and workman's compensation boards. Leave them there, please. There is no other ethical reason than when the doctor believes, for a medical reason or an educated guess, that there is no problem.
Do you wonder I don't trust these 'MS' neurologists?
<end of placebo rant>
rettahb wrote:.......Since then her veins re-colapsed and immediatly she lost what she had gained. Ultimately she went back and had the stents replaced and she is back to regaining her abilities again. ( I did not realize you could get them out once their in?).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users