Just a note that it is not a procedure for MS, per se. It is a procedure to treat the newly identified condition of venous stenoses known as CCSVI. While this may be highly associated with MS and may encompass some symptoms (cogfog, fatigue) previously ascribed to MS, we don't yet know the precise relationship between CCSVI and MS.
It would've felt more comfortable going for the procedure if the researchers were further along in the discovery process. But I reached the threshold for myself where I had enough information to go for it. One of my jugulars was blocked 100%, the other was blocked 80%, and I had symptoms of cerebral hypoxia. Angioplasty is a common procedure, in use for over twenty years, done on an outpatient basis. Even so I travelled to go with a doctor I trusted, who was experienced with the procedure, and whose beliefs aligned with my own on the importance of things like anticoagulation and IVUS.
I just think that instead of talking about patients' rights to CCSVI, we should be talking about patients' rights to make informed decisions when they are this important.
We have touched on this before, although it's been some months. The idea being that you can't consent to the risks when the risks are unknown. This is different from Tysabri, for example, which has a risk of fatality but you can consent to that because it is known.
Belmont ethics report:
Beginning with the first section of the Belmont report, we can think about the distinction between practice and research and whether there is a reasonable expectation of success when the CCSVI treatment is performed.