rainer wrote:I am proposing a theory that MS is caused by aliens undetectable by current scientific instruments. Until it is disproved I expect full support and funding from all governments and MS organizations.
blossom wrote:i would really like to kinda make a proposition to some of the big name neuro.'s especially neuro. surgeons who really i wish they would get on board because bottom line i feel that to solve this miserable ms puzzle we will need "a village". but here goes-it is really easy for some of the neuro.'s to verbally say ccsvi has no merit or ccsvi in no way helps ms or it's hogwash. now there are some very good top of the line doctors working on ccsvi and have come up with some pretty good evidence that ccsvi does have an involvement with ms and are treating people with some success. not a perfect score yet but impressive.
i would like to see the neuro.'s really working hard to scientifically prove there is absolutely no connection between ms and ccsvi. i wish they would start burning the midnight oil to scientifically prove it will not help ms. they should be testing and treating ms patients. looking at every vein and artery under a microscope following the patients just so they can "prove it wrong". not just say it's wrong.
the dr.'s who believe in ccsvi are being made to jump through the hoops when they make a statement. they seem to have to continually prove theirself (which is ok) they are working to continually learn more and improve outcomes. they, i feel really want to help us. they are working hard to be right and get it right and say it's right..
in my life i found at times when i was out to prove someone or something wrong i worked really hard at it because god i hated to be wrong. i just knew i was right but i had to prove them wrong. and in doing so i had to check out a lot of stuff. i had to "prove" them wrong. guess what i sat out to prove them wrong and it actually proved them right in one instance - had to eat crow- proving wrong verses proving right actually ended up creating and solving and it had a happier ending--because i just had to "prove" them wrong.
so, yeah, i want the nay sayers to step up-work real hard honestly, no back stabbing, no sneaky stuff, no shaddy paper work, no getting in bed with the ones who stand to loose if ccsvi can't be proven wrong, just do everything they can to "prove" it wrong. just so it's all above board, no shaddy stuff.
it's easy to say something is right or wrong. proveing it can hard. my money is on ccsvi being a big part of ms. the challenge is "prove" it wrong. in trying to prove ccsvi wrong i feel it will prove it right and with a lot more options and all kinds of good stuff. and hey, it's not bad to have to eat crow as long as the outcome is for a greater good. hope there some takers. i'm sick and tired of being sickand tired.
scorpion wrote:Maybe if Zamboni ever releases his ultrasound protocol they would have a place to start?
drsclafani wrote:simone wrote:drsclafani wrote:That ultrasound is quite specific. The Doppler is quite relevant and the images need to be taken in just the right way, otherwise the diagnosis is unclear.
So it is clear that we need to create a standard. that standard needs to be specific, reproducible and simple.
by the time i learn this one, paolo may have perfected a US test that is easier to do with similar reliability.
Is anyone in the US or anywhere doing that?
no, he is really trying to validate it. He is not ready to publishWhat are your thoughts on how to create a standard? [ If you don't mind]
a standard should be evidence based, practical and reproducible. It should be inclusive but with high expectations. It should be reviewable, and available. It should be by consensus.ps did i hear dr Z say they are going to do a blinded study of sort? ( brain fog is getting worse)
Users browsing this forum: daniel