It seems as though the US and Canadian MS Societies funding for CCSVI studies is aimed at putting a nail in the CCSVI coffin, once and for all.
Their results have already been previewed in the Dutch and Germany studies coming out of the world of neurology. If you don't follow the protocols, you won't find the problems and we can all go back to life with expensive drugs with awful side effects that do little to stop progression of this nasty disease.
Dr. Aaron Miller, chief scientific adviser to the U.S. National MS Society, makes it clear in the quote below that the rantings of IR's will not provide the science necessary to make CCSVI acceptable.
Meanwhile, the editor of the Canadian Medical Association journal warns against the dangers of treatment.
Dr. Paul Hebert, a critical care physician and editor-in-chief of the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
Though treatment advocates believe it is relatively risk-free, Hebert says manipulating fragile veins can be dangerous.
"We normally only dilate arteries. Dilating veins is highly experimental and the structures are so weak that people will die," he warns.
"At some point it will happen because putting in vascular catheters is dangerous at the best of times."
Dr. Aaron Miller, head of the MS clinic at New York's Mount Sinai Hospital and chief scientific
adviser to the U.S. National MS Society.
Could these unmonitored treatment trips lead to conclusive evidence? Miller suspects not."One would be dependent on the people doing the procedures to provide useful information. And the validity of the information provided by the people doing these procedures is not necessarily the kind of information that we would like from a scientific perspective."Miller explains the procedures are mainly being done by interventional radiologists. They know about imaging vessels, but they may not know a lot about multiple sclerosis.
"So if they alone are going to provide the data, the data is of questionable validity. It would be comparable to my trying to produce credible information on some other subspecialty area that I don't have any expertise in."
We are climbing Mount Everest!
And the question for Dr. S, is: With this kind of opposition, is it really possible to make any progress?