CCSVI and the doubtful promise of an endovascular treatment for MS
From the article:
There is no other model of decreased venous drainage and an organ specific immune response.
I believe this to be incorrect. Perhaps Cheerleader could comment on this, but I seem to recall that she has stated that there is immune activation seen with other organs affected by venous stenosis.
More evidence is needed to establish the association between CCSVI and MS. If more solid clinical evidence can confirm that the CCSVI–MS relationship is real, randomized clinical trials will be required to assess the benefits of endovascular interventions. If these trials establish a benefit for endovascular therapy, then at that point treatment can be made widely available. However, until these steps are taken, in our opinion, there is no role for the endovascular treatment of CCSVI in the MS patient outside of approved clinical trials.
Great, the link between MS and CCSVI is still in question. So what? Does that really matter? Maybe with respect to the long term research objective. However, if people have impaired blood drainage from a major organ of the body, such as the brain, then why should it not be fixed if possible? If impaired blood drainage involved the liver, kidneys, a limb, or some other organ, then fixing it would not be controversial.
One question, why do they seem to conveniently overlook the preliminary results of the work in Kuwait while they cite the preliminary results in Buffalo? The Kuwaiti trial comparing 100 MS patients to 100 controls has shown that CCSVI was found in 87% of MS patients but only in 7% of controls via doppler testing.