This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Welcome to the world's leading forum on Multiple Sclerosis research, support, and knowledge. For over 10 years, This is MS has provided an unbiased community dedicated to Multiple Sclerosis patients, caregivers, and affected loved ones.
It is currently Sat May 25, 2013 1:59 am


All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:17 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:00 pm
Posts: 228
Location: Argentina
Well, "skeptical of everything" mindset is not objective in my opinion. And you are not skeptical of everything as your stance on neck's massage based on two published cases proves otherwise.

I think that you are skeptical about CCSVI only.

But, let's return to the purpose of this thread, to discuss the merits of Simka's presentation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:23 am 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8511
The blurb does not say but it seems reasonable to assume these findings are from treatments, so it is the gold standard of full catheter venogram.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:33 am 
fernando wrote:
Well, "skeptical of everything" mindset is not objective in my opinion. And you are not skeptical of everything as your stance on neck's massage based on two published cases proves otherwise.

I think that you are skeptical about CCSVI only.

But, let's return to the purpose of this thread, to discuss the merits of Simka's presentation.


I really don't have a stance on neck message, just when I've read about IJV thrombosis it was mentioned, so I brought it up.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 9:44 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 2988
Location: Brooklyn, New York
concerned wrote:
I don't "believe" that Simka is falsifying data, but just like when drug companies pay to do studies (the results are almost always in favour of the drug, I think something like 95% of the time) compared with independent studies (which usually show much less positive results), I would still like to see an independent study, as Euromedic is pulling in millions of dollars.



I'm sorry Dr. Sclafani, I'm just skeptical of everything.


skepticism is good. of course you are correct but even Mother teresa and Albert Scweizer must have had biases

The problem is that you cannot trust research unless it is a government sponsored trial performed by people who are not consultants for a drug company, who work at a university where their pay is not pegged to what they do; at a university that does not receive any funding from pharma or other commercial interests, where patients are blinded to the treatment and where the none of the members of the editorial board of the journal are consultants for a commercial interest. Wait, government pays the health bills so they have a commercial interest too.

We will just have to analyze critically and skeptically and wait for repetitive validation....and then hope for the best. Because as Dr. Jelenek said, nothing is proven.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 9:51 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:00 pm
Posts: 474
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
concerned wrote:
I think Simka's results are highly suspect as he makes his living off of CCSVI. I would like to see some independent results.


surprise surprise ... not ever good enough for the 'skeptics'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:01 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:00 pm
Posts: 690
so at the same ectrims conference 3 or 4 other people presented papers where they found the opposite of this.
Interesting. Maybe its not simka who's fudging data but buffalo et al.

since I am behind dake and his 20/20 1 year mri results I think ms causes ccsvi, so I back simka. All the others must be wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:47 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:00 pm
Posts: 131
Location: South Pacific
Billmeik wrote:
I think ms causes ccsvi, so I back simka. All the others must be wrong.


Interestingly Simka concludes that CCSVI does not trigger MS in one of his papers

"Conclusion. Their severity and localization significantly modify clinical course of this disease. However, they are not likely to directly trigger multiple sclerosis."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:13 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8511
dreddk, do you have the link handy for that or the full presentation blurb? I'm not sure what Simka means by that.

Billmeik, I am confused, Dake's 1-year MRI results are reportedly fantastic and free of new MS lesions, which would not be expected from the patients' previous course.

If treating CCSVI is effective at keeping MS lesions from forming, then the logic would be that CCSVI was involved in causing them.

If we were to take it the other way and say MS was causing the CCSVI, we would expect the 1-year results to show the beginnings of new CCSVI malformations in the jugular and azygous.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:17 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8511
drsclafani wrote:
concerned wrote:
I don't "believe" that Simka is falsifying data, but just like when drug companies pay to do studies (the results are almost always in favour of the drug, I think something like 95% of the time) compared with independent studies (which usually show much less positive results), I would still like to see an independent study, as Euromedic is pulling in millions of dollars.



I'm sorry Dr. Sclafani, I'm just skeptical of everything.


skepticism is good. of course you are correct but even Mother teresa and Albert Scweizer must have had biases

The problem is that you cannot trust research unless it is a government sponsored trial performed by people who are not consultants for a drug company, who work at a university where their pay is not pegged to what they do; at a university that does not receive any funding from pharma or other commercial interests, where patients are blinded to the treatment and where the none of the members of the editorial board of the journal are consultants for a commercial interest. Wait, government pays the health bills so they have a commercial interest too.

We will just have to analyze critically and skeptically and wait for repetitive validation....and then hope for the best. Because as Dr. Jelenek said, nothing is proven.

concerned, I like what Dr. Sclafani has said here. Dare I hope that this is what it takes for you to pull back from extreme skepticism to slightly less extreme and more palatable skepticism? Either way, Happy Thanksgiving to you and that person with MS whom you love.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:20 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:00 pm
Posts: 131
Location: South Pacific
Hi Cece

Confused me slightly too but I'll dig up the paper for you

D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:40 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:00 pm
Posts: 131
Location: South Pacific
Discussion here http://www.thisisms.com/ftopic-8585-420 ... rasc-.html

Appears he thinks ccsvi causes some symptoms of ms but does not trigger ms. Might need to download the whole paper to understand these thoughts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:43 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8511
thanks dreddk, I'll check it out
Quote:
"CORRELATION OF LOCALIZATION AND SEVERITY OF EXTRACRANIAL
VENOUS LESIONS WITH CLINICAL STATUS OF MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
Simka M, Ludyga T, Kazibudzki M, Latacz P, Świerad M, Piegza J
EUROMEDIC Specialist Clinics, Department of Vascular & Endovascular Surgery, Katowice; Poland.

ABSTRACT:
Background. Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency is suspected to play a role in pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis.

Objective. Assessment of the correlations between patterns of venous lesions and clinical characteristics of multiple sclerosis.

Methods. Localization and degree of venous blockages in multiple sclerosis 381 patients were evaluated using catheter venography. Analysis of clinical severity included: Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29), chronic fatigue and heat intolerance assessment.

Results. Venous blockages were found in 97.1% of the patients. Abnormalities were more severe in older patients. No correlation existed between duration of the disease and severity of venous pathologies. Patients with younger age at onset of multiple sclerosis presented with milder venous lesions. Significant correlations existed between severity and localization of venous lesions and clinical burden in terms of MSIS-29 and chronic fatigue scores, but not of heat intolerance.

Conclusion. Prevalence of chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency among multiple sclerosis patients is very high. Indirect data analysis indicated that venous abnormalities are probably congenital, slowly progress, but are unlikely to be caused by multiple sclerosis.

Their severity and localization significantly modify clinical course of this disease. However, they are not likely to directly trigger multiple sclerosis, but there may be another factor initiating the disease."

and also from a Simka paper:
ErikaSlovakia wrote:
"Then, we tried to evaluate the correlation between patients’ age and degree of venous lesions. Potentially, this analysis could help in answering the following question: are venous lesions seen in MS patients static, or, on the contrary, they tend to become more severe and
numerous as the patient gets older. We have found that CCSVI abnormalities were more severe in older patients (Fig. 7 and 8). This may mean that these vascular malformations progress. However, this progression is likely to be very slow. It seems that for an average
lesion takes 40 years to gain one point in our scale. Importantly, number of the lesions seemed to be constant. Thus, probably no new lesions develop in an adult patient."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:55 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 1068
Cece wrote:
dreddk, do you have the link handy for that or the full presentation blurb? I'm not sure what Simka means by that.

Billmeik, I am confused, Dake's 1-year MRI results are reportedly fantastic and free of new MS lesions, which would not be expected from the patients' previous course.

If treating CCSVI is effective at keeping MS lesions from forming, then the logic would be that CCSVI was involved in causing them.

If we were to take it the other way and say MS was causing the CCSVI, we would expect the 1-year results to show the beginnings of new CCSVI malformations in the jugular and azygous.


At least one person reported a new lesion seen on MRI after having been treated by Dr. Dake.

But beyond that, you're leaping to a conclusion based on a very small data set, take over a very short period of time. And at least some of those treated by Dr. Dake were in the secondary progressive stage, when the formation of new lesions is seen less.

I have had 3 MRIs over the last year and a half, and I have had no new brain lesions. Yet, I never had treatment for CCSVI.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:20 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8511
patientx wrote:
At least one person reported a new lesion seen on MRI after having been treated by Dr. Dake.

But beyond that, you're leaping to a conclusion based on a very small data set, take over a very short period of time.

Not to mention: unpublished, not peer-reviewed yet, etc.
Quote:
And at least some of those treated by Dr. Dake were in the secondary progressive stage, when the formation of new lesions is seen less.

I have had 3 MRIs over the last year and a half, and I have had no new brain lesions. Yet, I never had treatment for CCSVI.

You make good points. Can't wait til we have more data on actual treatments. I think it's coming, just never quickly enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. CCSVI associated with PP and SP and duration of disease

Cece

7

587

Thu Aug 16, 2012 8:46 am

cervocuit View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Severity of CCSVI in patients with MS assessed

squiffy2

0

1053

Sun Feb 28, 2010 2:10 am

squiffy2 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Can diet & supplements reduce CCSVI severity?

squiffy2

10

1317

Sat Oct 09, 2010 5:27 am

bluesky63 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Stenosis and severity of MS correlation

LR1234

11

1619

Sat Nov 21, 2009 8:17 pm

radeck View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. MS onset age and level of severity

sbr487

0

805

Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:30 am

sbr487 View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: