I think that is a fair question. We can use the Michael Specter denialism criterias on the reluctance to accept new theories as well.
1. Conspiracy theories ( vascular surgeons wanting pice of the cake, or their 15 minutes of fame )
2. Cherry picking ( only Buffalo study is worth watching, after all the other studies are forgin )
3. Moving the goalpost ( we need more proof, we need more proof, even if it is staring us in the eye we cant see it )
This enormous caution is in my opinion due to a reluctanse to try something new. No winnings have ever been made without a bit of risk.
I had liberation treatment done 2 weeks ago, and I far from regret it, even if I am not healed, I am feeling better and stronger, my everyday life is easier. To the researchers that is not relevant info, it is only anecdotal evidence, but to me it is the only thing that matters.
They say they need blinded trials, to rule out placebo. To you need to have a control group to fix a stenosed bloodvessle. Or can you say, stenosis found, stenosis fixed. Its broken, fix it!!
<div>I have lived with ms for 8 years. The last year has been hell, I've gone from shite to even worse every single month, until my liberation in May. </div>