I would like to see a multi-center study that gets published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal that shows "liberation" is a viable treatment for MS.
Has there been anything besides the initial Zamboni study that has been published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal?
OK ... what if we're not treating MS ... but symptoms that have been lumped in under MS?
What if we're just opening up veins ... with CCSVI ... and it happens to improve "MS" symptoms along the way? Are the centers testing "MS" ... or are they testing whether opening veins impacted symptoms?
Because obviously opening veins impacts symptoms ... not just in "MS" patients, but in general. That has already been proven.
EDIT to say ... what if by the time you have "MS" it's too late to "cure" it? I don't believe that's necessarily true. But the longer the damage, the more likely CCSVI will not necessarily be a cure, but maybe a stopgap potentially. But what IF CCSVI was treated before "MS" happened ... is that proof? And at what point does that statement become ridiculous, because do you test EVERY person in the country for venous problems (and at what age?)
So let's say an MS patient has May-Thurner. And a swollen painful leg due to clots or just a stenotic vein (iliac). Should venoplasty not be performed on that person because we don't know how venoplasty will impact their "MS" symptom of pain? And is it "anecdotal" when the report a relief in "pain" after venoplasty?
regarding published: most trials last well over a year, then the time to write and edit. CCSVI is about 18 months old (at most) ... the first "clinical trial" in the US was Dr. Mehta ... that started less than 3 months ago. Unless you count Kuwait ... it's going to be a while until you get those results ... but they're sure to come.