This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Nothing major but still...

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/06/prweb4113784.htm

http://www.mastersofms.com/masters_qas.php

Among others he says:
"My view at this point is that CCSVI is associated with MS; however it is yet to be determined whether CCSVI is among the risk factors that, along with others, increase a person’s susceptibility to developing this disease. The fact that CCSVI prevalence is about 38% in patients with a first clinical attack of MS and almost 90% in those with secondary progressive MS and a disease history of 20 years suggests to me that venous insufficiency has a high likelihood of affecting people with MS over time. "

Makes me wonder how MS can contribute so a person is born with one of his jugs missing, a bone to pinch a vein, membranes to occlude a vein etc etc. Invasive procedures being the best way to properly diagnose this condition is a bummer. But it's the only way for answers to come.

Isn't this great?! Cooperation with Zamboni, trial with 16 MS patients.

Zivadinov: 'In this trial, the primary outcomes were change in volume of lesions on MRI and number of MS relapses'.

I am disappointed that he provided this incorrect statement that may discourage people from seeking liberation. One California patient did die after treatment, but all of the evidence I have seen says her death was related to the blood thinners and not the treatment itself. The patient whose stent dislodged did not die, so there were not "deaths".

I believe he knows better and am sorry to see him repeat the lie circulating among neurologists and being repeated to the public.

From http://www.mastersofms.com/masters_qas.php

He did not said "because" he said "whose"

I think the implication is clear. Even the broadest interpretation accounts for one death, not multiple.

I expect that eventually a liberated patient will die from cancer, a traffic accident, or any other cause. It will be equally misleading to associate that death with the liberation treatment.

Lets be fair. The death was due to the fact that the patient had the procedure. If she had not, she would not have been on the blood thinner. Deaths from anesthesia are a risk factor of surgery, even if the surgical procedure does not cause the death, the anesthesia does. And we do not know if the MS added to the risk factor in taking the blood thinner, so it is possible, if unlikely, that the proceedure is riskier for MS patients because it necessarily involves the use of blood thinner.

That being said, it was "a death" and not "deaths" which is an unfortunate lie being spread by the neurologists and MS societies, and they never seem to mention the deaths the drug treatments cause. That is "acceptable risk". And until we get the studies done, we will never know the risk involved in liberation tretment, with and without stents.

She was on two blood thinners, according to what her long-term boyfriend recently posted. (Coumadin and Plavix? I'd have to find the post to say which two for sure.)

It struck me as quite unusual for a person to be prescribed two blood thinners with this procedure.

_________________
"However, the truth in science ultimately emerges, although sometimes it takes a very long time," Arthur Silverstein, Autoimmunity: A History of the Early Struggle for Recognition

Please. pay attention to the news! Z & Z checked out 16 MS patients and found some promising results...

Me, I am allergic to anaesthetic. It's potentially fatal for me and, following GA, I very nearly died but I've never thought of it as the operation itself being to blame. That's just me though.

You could argue that, in this sad case, the death wasn't due to the procedure or the blood thinners but to MS.

But when people die under anaesthesia due to dental work (quite common since, in most dental facilities they haven't the means to resuscitate a patient) you don't say 'having root canal surgery killed this person,' you say 'this person died because of a rare allergy to anaesthesia,' surely?

Aren't the 'primary outcomes' just a way to describe the way in which the results will be judged?

I'm confident they'll be good results but they haven't been presented yet. He just said what the criteria for them would be, no?

I can only assume you mean anesthetics in general and not related to venoplasty/angioplasty. The only anesthetic used for the procedure is a local one as this is not 'surgery'.