The need for a double blind clinical trial

A forum to discuss Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency and its relationship to Multiple Sclerosis.

The need for a double blind clinical trial

Postby Direct-MS » Wed Dec 01, 2010 8:58 am

'Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related
to gravitational challenge: systematic review of
randomized controlled trials '

Abstract
Objectives To determine whether parachutes are
effective in preventing major trauma related to
gravitational challenge.
Design Systematic review of randomized controlled
trials.
Data sources: Medline,Web of Science, Embase, and
the Cochrane Library databases; appropriate internet
sites and citation lists.
Study selection: Studies showing the effects of using
a parachute during free fall.
Main outcome measure Death or major trauma,
defined as an injury severity score > 15.
Results We were unable to identify any randomised
controlled trials of parachute intervention.
Conclusions As with many interventions intended to
prevent ill health, the effectiveness of parachutes has
not been subjected to rigorous evaluation by using
randomised controlled trials. Advocates of evidence
based medicine have criticised the adoption of
interventions evaluated by using only observational
data.We think that everyone might benefit if the most
radical protagonists of evidence based medicine
organised and participated in a double blind,
randomised, placebo controlled, crossover trial of the
parachute.
User avatar
Direct-MS
Family Member
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:00 pm

Advertisement

Postby Cece » Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:16 am

bravo!
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9012
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm

Postby CCSVIhusband » Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:39 am

JAT stewardess Vesna Vulović survived a fall of 33,000 feet (10,000 m) on January 26, 1972 when she was aboard JAT Flight 367. The plane was brought down by explosives over Srbská Kamenice in the former Czechoslovakia (now Czech Republic). The Serbian stewardess suffered a broken skull, three broken vertebrae (one crushed completely), and was in a coma for 27 days. In an interview she commented that, according to the man who found her, "...I was in the middle part of the plane. I was found with my head down and my colleague on top of me. One part of my body with my leg was in the plane and my head was out of the plane. A catering trolley was pinned against my spine and kept me in the plane. The man who found me, says I was very lucky. He was in the German Army as a medic during World War two. He knew how to treat me at the site of the accident."

So ... maybe after surviving a fall from that point, parachutes aren't necessary? I'm just trying to be a skeptic here ... :lol:
User avatar
CCSVIhusband
Family Elder
 
Posts: 474
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Postby concerned » Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:41 am

I sure am skeptical of something...


8O
concerned
 

Postby Cece » Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:43 am

anecdotal, for sure :D
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9012
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm

Postby CCSVIhusband » Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:55 am

Cece wrote:anecdotal, for sure :D


There are more if you don't believe me ...

In World War II there were several reports of military aircrew surviving long falls: Nick Alkemade, Alan Magee, and Ivan Chisov all fell at least 5,500 metres (18,000 ft) and survived.

Juliane Köpcke survived a long free fall resulting from the December 24, 1971, crash of LANSA Flight 508 (a LANSA Lockheed Electra OB-R-941 commercial airliner) in the Peruvian rainforest. The airplane was struck by lightning during a severe thunderstorm and exploded in mid air, disintegrating two miles up. Köpcke, who was 17 years old at the time, fell to earth still strapped into her seat. She survived the fall with only a broken collarbone, a gash to her right arm, and her right eye swollen shut.

Maybe we shouldn't use parachutes until these studies suggested by Direct-MS have run their gamut though ... agreed?
User avatar
CCSVIhusband
Family Elder
 
Posts: 474
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Postby oreo » Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:46 am

Actually I think this is a very poor analogy which only serves to make the CCSVI camp look fooloish.

By the way, have any of you heard of crash test dummies. They are used whenever testing saftey devices whose basic purpose is to save human life & limb. The testers would never put a real human life in that much danger.
Carpe Diem
User avatar
oreo
Family Elder
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Canada - Ontario - South-West

Postby concerned » Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:51 am

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/parachut ... hutes.html


Parachutes are based on sound scientific premises and are easily shown to be effective... A kid playing with a grocery bag can tell you as much.

Could a kid play with a person with MS and tell you that reflux is causing it, and that venoplasty will fix it?

Have people been performing Liberation since 1595?

I really don't get the analogy.
concerned
 

Postby bwdst6 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:56 am

I'd hate to be one that got the placebo! 8O
User avatar
bwdst6
Newbie
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:00 pm

Postby CCSVIhusband » Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:24 am

Shows who has a sense of humor and who doesn't ... that's for sure.

Lighten up you anti-ccsviers.
User avatar
CCSVIhusband
Family Elder
 
Posts: 474
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Postby scorpion » Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:39 am

bwdst6 wrote:I'd hate to be one that got the placebo! 8O


:lol: :lol:


"In a double-blind trial, one researcher allocates a series of numbers to 'new treatment' or 'old treatment'. The second researcher is told the numbers, but not what they have been allocated to. Since the second researcher does not know, they cannot possibly tell the patient, directly or otherwise, and cannot give in to patient pressure to give them the new treatment. In this system, there is also often a more realistic distribution of sexes and ages of patients. Therefore double-blind (or randomized) trials are preferred, as they tend to give the most accurate results."

Most legit researchers would agree with the above statement.
From what I have seen the people who tend to avoid double-blinded trials are the ones who do not feel confident in their hypothesis. Zamboni is calling for double-blinded trials. Sure lets just get rid of double-blinded trials all togethor and give the quacks free reign to claim whatener they want to make a quick buck. Getting rid of double-blinded trials would levae people as vulnerable to quackery as well...jumping out of an airplane without a parachute would..ummmmm nevermind.
User avatar
scorpion
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:00 pm

Postby scorpion » Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:44 am

CCSVIhusband wrote:Shows who has a sense of humor and who doesn't ... that's for sure.
Lighten up you anti-ccsviers.


It does not show anything. It first needs to be proven via double-blinded trial. 8)
User avatar
scorpion
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:00 pm

Postby concerned » Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:46 am

I think I may have been in the sham joke treatment arm of this trial. :lol:
concerned
 

Postby bwdst6 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:01 pm

scorpion wrote:Most legit researchers would agree with the above statement.
From what I have seen the people who tend to avoid double-blinded trials are the ones who do not feel confident in their hypothesis. Zamboni is calling for double-blinded trials. Sure lets just get rid of double-blinded trials all togethor and give the quacks free reign to claim whatener they want to make a quick buck. Getting rid of double-blinded trials would levae people as vulnerable to quackery as well...jumping out of an airplane without a parachute would..ummmmm nevermind.
Maybe, but I have something that is known as “common sense” (registered trademark) that can be used in the absense of a double blind study. It teaches me that jumping out of plane without something to slow me down is bad and improving circulation by fixing an abnormality is good!
User avatar
bwdst6
Newbie
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:00 pm

IT IS A FACT

Postby Gordon » Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:13 pm

Everyone who ate carrots in the 1800's are dead... Fact
User avatar
Gordon
Family Elder
 
Posts: 296
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 4:00 pm

Next

Return to Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI)

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service