New thread for L

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

New thread for L

Postby Lyon » Mon Dec 27, 2010 10:53 am

..
Last edited by Lyon on Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Lyon
Family Elder
 
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm

Advertisement

Re: New thread for L

Postby L » Mon Dec 27, 2010 11:09 am

Lyon wrote:Without using the term "seems like" please point out the evidence supporting the theory of CCSVI?


I'm significantly better than I was one month ago.
User avatar
L
Family Elder
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: The United Kingdom

Re: New thread for L

Postby Lyon » Mon Dec 27, 2010 11:12 am

..
Last edited by Lyon on Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lyon
Family Elder
 
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm

Postby bruce123 » Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:18 pm

Lyon wrote: a sensible person needs to look at the "facts" and the odds in this situation.


Lyon..Lyon...Lyon, I wish that you would look at the "facts". The fact is that there is NO scientific proof that treating CCSVI does not help people with MS. You can't have it both ways. If you are going to continually fall back on the "show me the proof" line, then those who believe that treating CCSVI is good can use the same argument. There is scientific proof. It is just not yet conclusive and has not yet been fully published.

Lyon wrote: Going back to the beginning it needs to be recognized that over 90% of interesting MS theories turn out to be dust in the wind under further scrutiny.


Again, a misleading statement. How does this fact actually impact the validity of the CCSVI theories? Because others are wrong does not make this wrong. We need proof that it is wrong.

Lyon wrote: the theory of CCSVI would/should have died a silent death before most had ever even heard of it,


I don't think the 100's (1000's ?) of people who have benefited from CCSVI treatment would agree with you. I thank God for all those who continue to fight against those who want this to die.

Lyon wrote: All in all, a situation tailor made for Webster's definition of "placebo".


I thought the placebo argument was long dead. Are you really going to cling to the idea that everything you read from first-hand experience and everything you see on the videos is placebo. This would be the greatest placebo effect in the history of mankind! If my wife’s results are placebo that we need to change Webster’s definition.

I work in the field of scientific research. Dr. Zamboni did what every good scientist does. He did excellent research, to the limits of his resourses, and he published his findings as well as his hypothesis. The scientific community is then welcomed to comment and do further research. Dr. Zamboni has always welcomed this and it is happening as it should. The problem is with people like you who attack Dr. Zamboni's theory by using the approach that if it is not 100% correct then it is 100% wrong. This is not how it is in the real world, but it is an approach that many people are using to try to discredit his work.

I doubt that Dr. Banting and Dr. Best knew everything about insulin when they first published their findings, yet they are regarded as medical heroes. I believe that Dr. Zamboni will go down in history as a medical hero. Of course, this is just my opinion. I don't have scientific proof....yet.

Bruce.
User avatar
bruce123
Family Elder
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: New thread for L

Postby eric593 » Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:49 pm

L wrote:I'm significantly better than I was one month ago.


I am not significantly better than I was one month ago. I am not better at all following CCSVI treatment, in fact.

Bruce, that is the most convoluted mutilation of the principles of deductive reasoning that I have ever seen.
User avatar
eric593
Family Elder
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:00 pm

Postby soapdiva884 » Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:51 pm

Without using the term "seems like" please point out the evidence supporting the theory of CCSVI?

My bf is also significantly better since liberation too! Not cured, but feeling so much better than he did before the procedure.
Boyfriend dx'd 6-6-06!!! RRMS............CCSVI procedure done on Nov. 13, 2010 and March 7, 2011 by Dr. Sclafani!
User avatar
soapdiva884
Family Elder
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 3:00 pm

Postby CaptBoo » Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:54 pm

Lyon, this is an excellent post that thoroughly expresses your opinion on the subject. Please bump this post to the top of the discussion every day so you no longer have to highjack other peoples discussions to interject repetitive ideas. It will save you a lot of time and the rest of us idiots who have an interest in discussing and further pursuing the yet unproven concept of CCSVI can chat amongst ourselves without the continuing drone.

And just for your records, if you're keeping score, it worked for me and I really don't care what your opinion is as to why.
<div>There be no dragons   ...Reese Palley</div>
User avatar
CaptBoo
Family Elder
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: SC, NM

Re: New thread for L

Postby L » Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:55 pm

eric593 wrote:I am not significantly better than I was one month ago. I am not better at all following CCSVI treatment, in fact.


I'm sorry to hear this. Let's hope you experience some benefit from the procedure in the not too distant future.
User avatar
L
Family Elder
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: The United Kingdom

Re: New thread for L

Postby CCSVIhusband » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:13 pm

eric593 wrote:
L wrote:I'm significantly better than I was one month ago.


I am not significantly better than I was one month ago. I am not better at all following CCSVI treatment, in fact.

Bruce, that is the most convoluted mutilation of the principles of deductive reasoning that I have ever seen.


I read your tracking thread post you just made ... after a month you're not worse ... isn't that the goal of liberation really? Everyone hopes to get the amazing wow, look at this results, but if you get no worse - that's not bad.

Of course 1 month in the scheme of things isn't a long time, but it's a start. Let's hope THAT stays ... for ever.

Who treated you? if you don't mind our asking.
User avatar
CCSVIhusband
Family Elder
 
Posts: 474
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Re: New thread for L

Postby eric593 » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:20 pm

CCSVIhusband wrote:
eric593 wrote:
L wrote:I'm significantly better than I was one month ago.


I am not significantly better than I was one month ago. I am not better at all following CCSVI treatment, in fact.

Bruce, that is the most convoluted mutilation of the principles of deductive reasoning that I have ever seen.


I read your tracking thread post you just made ... after a month you're not worse ... isn't that the goal of liberation really? Everyone hopes to get the amazing wow, look at this results, but if you get no worse - that's not bad.

Of course 1 month in the scheme of things isn't a long time, but it's a start. Let's hope THAT stays ... for ever.

Who treated you? if you don't mind our asking.


As I said, I was stable before. I said there's been no change. Where did you get that I'm doing better in some way? I'm not, I'm the same.

I went to the same doctor as your wife did.
User avatar
eric593
Family Elder
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: New thread for L

Postby scorpion » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:34 pm

eric593 wrote:
CCSVIhusband wrote:
eric593 wrote:
L wrote:I'm significantly better than I was one month ago.


I am not significantly better than I was one month ago. I am not better at all following CCSVI treatment, in fact.

Bruce, that is the most convoluted mutilation of the principles of deductive reasoning that I have ever seen.


I read your tracking thread post you just made ... after a month you're not worse ... isn't that the goal of liberation really? Everyone hopes to get the amazing wow, look at this results, but if you get no worse - that's not bad.

Of course 1 month in the scheme of things isn't a long time, but it's a start. Let's hope THAT stays ... for ever.

Who treated you? if you don't mind our asking.


As I said, I was stable before. I said there's been no change. Where did you get that I'm doing better in some way? I'm not, I'm the same.

I went to the same doctor as your wife did.


Thanks for being honest Eric. Interestingly if someone's finger is less numb people will say it is from the liberation procedure but if you get worse after being liberated there are a tons of reasons why it did not work(restenosis, more blockages, not enough research yet,etc. etc.). While these reasons MIGHT fit into the equation it could also be that the entire venous system theory is just plain wrong. It certainly could and if you do not want to hear it I am sorry.
User avatar
scorpion
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: New thread for L

Postby CCSVIhusband » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:49 pm

eric593 wrote:
CCSVIhusband wrote:
eric593 wrote:
L wrote:I'm significantly better than I was one month ago.


I am not significantly better than I was one month ago. I am not better at all following CCSVI treatment, in fact.

Bruce, that is the most convoluted mutilation of the principles of deductive reasoning that I have ever seen.


I read your tracking thread post you just made ... after a month you're not worse ... isn't that the goal of liberation really? Everyone hopes to get the amazing wow, look at this results, but if you get no worse - that's not bad.

Of course 1 month in the scheme of things isn't a long time, but it's a start. Let's hope THAT stays ... for ever.

Who treated you? if you don't mind our asking.


As I said, I was stable before. I said there's been no change. Where did you get that I'm doing better in some way? I'm not, I'm the same.

I went to the same doctor as your wife did.


Ah, the good doctor! (please PM me about your experience there) ...

I didn't say you were doing any "better" in my post above. Please re-read it. I just said you weren't any worse, and that's not a bad thing.
User avatar
CCSVIhusband
Family Elder
 
Posts: 474
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA

Re: New thread for L

Postby L » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:58 pm

Hey, who gave you permission. 'New thread for L' is what it says. That's me.

But if you must..

scorpion wrote:it could also be that the entire venous system theory is just plain wrong.


I have got better in a few respects through the placebo effect, right? The stiffness in my hands, the dreadful car sickness, the problems swallowing have all gone because of the placebo effect? Despite the placebo effect never working in the past when the expectancy and the trepidation were lots higher, when taking other drugs? And all of those people in the videos and with the blog testimonials, that's placebo right? And the other people here on this forum who testify to the benefits of the procedure? And the many, many doctors who are performing the treatment are cashing in or misguided? Why do you repeat yourself over and over? Why not post in the Stem Cells forum and watch as no one disagrees? Why post, what purpose does it serve to repeat your opinion over and over that the CCSVI theory may have no basis? What is the point? We are discussing a theory that we believe in and trying our best to understand it, what we are doing develops our understanding to some degree. Wheras you, and Lyon, and others do nothing to help. It is just depressing to hear the same droning objections, over and over, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Why do it? Why not wait until you have something new to say? This is a forum for patients to exchange ideas, to exchange personal, anecdotal evidence. We all agree that further trials are desirable but that's where the agreement ends and from that point there is no further exchange, no progress, no discussion to be had. Haven't you got anything better to do than to meet every comment with the same monotonous arguments. I hate to say it, but essentially, you are unbelievably boring, encouraging this dull cyclical argument. Honestly, the phrase is usually completely unnecessary and I'd usually hate hearing it but have you not, for goodness sake, got any better ways to spend your time than this mindless repetition?
Last edited by L on Mon Dec 27, 2010 3:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
L
Family Elder
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: The United Kingdom

Postby garyak » Mon Dec 27, 2010 3:00 pm

it could also be that the entire venous system theory is just plain wrong. It certainly could and if you do not want to hear it I am sorry.

now scorpion, this "entire venous theory" has already been proven to have a very strong association with ms and my benefits are part of the proof treatment helps significantly. I want you to hear me and believe .
User avatar
garyak
Family Elder
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: grande prairie , alberta,canada

Postby Lyon » Mon Dec 27, 2010 3:24 pm

..
Last edited by Lyon on Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lyon
Family Elder
 
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 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