Squeakycat wrote:
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.
Quote:
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.
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?
SO LETS EXAMINE SOME OF THE STATEMENTS ABOVE:
dr herbert says
Quote:
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."
VEINS HAVE BEEN DILATED SINCE 1980. THE STATEMENT JUST GOES AGAINST COMMON SENSE AND PRACTICE...
but Dr Miller says it best if you ask me
Quote:
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.
Miller explains the procedures are mainly being done by interventional radiologists. They know about imaging vessels
"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."
DR MILLER AREN'T YOU NOW TRYING TO PRODUCE OPINION ON SOME OTHER SUBSPECIALTY AREA THAT YOU DONT HAVE ANY EXPERTISE IN?
radiologists were told that angioplasty could not work for arteries...NOW STANDARD OF CARE
IRs were told that they could not drain empyema of the chest...STANDARD OF CARE
IRs were told they could not drain large abdominal abscesses because you needed to put in a surgical drain.....STANDARD OF CARE
IRs were told fibroids required hysterectomy....Today i treated two women who did not want their uterus removed.....STANDARD OF CARE
IRs were told that injured spleens needed to be cut out. Now IR controls the hemorrhage and patients keep their organ and heal without surgery....STANDARD OF CARE
i believe that we WILL collect the evidence and we will show an outcome and you will decide whether the data is sufficient for you to undergo this procedure.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
