This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Et Vlan!
Good job debp!
I read that to! Dr Salvi being a neuro he did not became a believer just for Dr Z good look (!?!) but yet it will never be enough for "some"...

You should have specified that you meant "the assumption of dishonesty and the presumption of either incompetence or lying" in the context of Zamboni et al., because I think you all like to do that very same thing towards the "non-believers", and furthermore find such behavior commendable.

1eye I would think you would be begging for this type of study to be completed to quiet the "skeptics"

I would also like to see a paper written on Ms. Farrel's case, to reveal why she was close to death, and what was done to enable her to return home.

As skeptics commenting on an MS internet site none of us (of course) can speak for what the majority of "organized medicine" would consider acceptable proof, although it seems that they are calling for no less than the most accurate testing possible, and that seems nearly unanimously considered to be venous catheter.

Me personally? For what little it's worth I've called all along for equal testing between controls and those with MS using the most accurate testing available to us and at this point that seems to be venous catheter. Invasive, yes, but there is no avoiding the fact that inaccurate tests lead to inaccurate results and all of us have read of plenty false positives and negatives with all the other testing methods.

It might not be popular, but the only way to distance CCSVI from it's "Ouija board" testing reputation is to do equal and accurate (within our ability) testing on those with and without MS. From what I've seen it's uncontested that venous catheter is the most accurate test available at this time.

It might not be popular, but the only way to distance CCSVI from it's "Ouija board" testing reputation is to do equal and accurate (within our ability) testing on those with and without MS. From what I've seen it's uncontested that venous catheter is the most accurate test available at this time.

I would rather see an attempt to reproduce the finding of 38% reduction in gadolinium-enhancing lesions, for which no blinding or placebo procedures are necessary.

This favorable neurologic outcome was also confirmed by the significant reduction in Gad lesions on the 1-year MRI; however, our open-label design requires caution in evaluating this finding. MRI was not always performed with the same instrument, followed the same protocol, or was at the same intervals.

Almost any clinical trial on CCSVI would involve MRI measures, hence the need for clinical trials.

The FDA wants it measured by clinical indicators, not MRI. I think.

http://www.falsecreekdiagnostics.com/ccsvi-ms-studies/ccsvi-blood-flow-study/

I do not know if this study is blinded. I do know that the study is underway and that they are/were very particular with their choice of 'healthy' controls. No blood relatives. No known cardiovascular issues. A friend was graciously rejected, as a healthy candidate, due to PAD.

I don't think this is a matter for the FDA, anyway. As I understand it, the FDA regulates drugs and medical devices, not procedures.