Vikingquest wrote:Agree whole heartedly, Lyon.
Cece, I'm glad that you are better after your ccsvi treatment, and I wouldn't want to take anything away from that, but the fact is that if the ccsvi treatment has made some people actually worse, then how can you claim it as a potential cure?
We need real data....
Some people may get worse because of a failure of angioplasty. Either it reverts to how it was initially or, worse, it scars or clots and the patient has more serious outflow obstructions. This sort of risk, however, would fit into the overall picture once benefits/risks are known. All minimally invasive surgical procedures still carry risks, but they are done everyday despite those risks, because the risk/benefit ratio is considered to be acceptable. I am very interested in the improvement of angioplasty techniques to minimize complications. The procedure is not yet standardized, and that is not a good thing.
Some people may get worse because MS gets worse, and this was the course they were already on, and perhaps the stress of the procedure or the travel took a toll.
I don't think that improved cerebral blood flow is detrimental to one's health.
I also don't think I claimed CCSVI treatment as a potential cure? The 'c' word has a lot of connotations and emotional baggage of which it's good to steer clear. I would claim CCSVI treatment as an exciting new weapon in the arsenal, and that the paradigm shift of understanding CCSVI in MS is an opportunity for new pharmacological treatments as well. I don't consider myself cured. I am better, though.