New study challenges controversial MS treatment

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

New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby fiddler » Tue Aug 21, 2012 5:19 pm

Interesting... a meta-study soon to come out soon will say that there are no studies that have been appropriately undertaken that can attest to the efficacy or otherwise of CCSVI treatment for MS symptoms.... yet this neurologist KNOWS that this one study (which may or may not have been appropriately done) absolutely PROVES that the treatment is useless: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/hea ... le4490423/. What a scientist! And here I am, 27 months into my placebo effect... I think we should wait for some real, valid research before we pass judgement.
Dx SPMS in 2004.  Liberated 29/04/2010.
My blog: www.my-darn-ms.blogspot.com
User avatar
fiddler
Family Elder
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:00 pm
Location: Fredericton, Canada

Advertisement

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby erinc14 » Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:38 am

i always notice the tone / wording of negative articles odd.
User avatar
erinc14
Family Elder
 
Posts: 599
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 2:00 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby tiltawhirl » Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:42 am

Four months of placebo effect here, and getting stronger.

tilt
...and I for one, welcome our new Neurologist overlords!

My before and after CCSVI treatment video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhosV4_DvWw
Visit my Lego Amusement Rides website http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=Bolliger
tiltawhirl
Family Elder
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 7:47 pm

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby Cece » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:08 am

“The debate in the scientific community was brief, swift and is over,” said David Hafler, chairman of the neurology department at the Yale School of Medicine. “The government has squandered precious resources not using peer-review, but instead using emotion and theologic belief and I think shame on the Canadian government for bowing into those pressures.”

geez
let's look for intraluminal abnormalities with tools that can actually see intraluminal abnormalities: ultrasound, intravascular ultrasound, flouroscopy, autopsy
MRI has its value but is imperfect
and the study appears to have again confirmed the association (more CCSVI is present in MS patients than in healthy controls)
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9054
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:00 pm

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby cheerleader » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:17 am

The Globe and Mail has a particular slant, I'd say....

and the study also showed that CCSVI was linked to slowed blood flow through the brain.
Thirty-nine patients with MS and 26 healthy controls participated in the study. The patients with MS had tested positive for CCSVI by CDU.
The researchers found that the CCSVI-positive patients did show decreased blood flow and volume compared with the controls.

http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/mri/co ... 19/2098013
That's kind of a big deal....hypoperfusion is not good for brain health.
cheer
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5094
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: southern California

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby milesap » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:02 pm

User avatar
milesap
Family Elder
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:00 pm

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby cheerleader » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:18 pm

milesap--David's wife Sarah posts on This Is MS as Anecdote---you can find lots of info in the antibiotic thread. Jeff did the NAC test and was negative. http://www.davidwheldon.co.uk/NAC.html
Marie Rhodes did the Wheldon protocol for a while, but didn't help. Certainly a worthwhile avenue for those who restenose or do not benefit from venoplasty.
cheer
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5094
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: southern California

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby NHE » Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:39 pm

cheerleader wrote:milesap--David's wife Sarah posts on This Is MS as Anecdote---you can find lots of info in the antibiotic thread. Jeff did the NAC test and was negative. http://www.davidwheldon.co.uk/NAC.html


How does one distinguish between NAC's normal mucus thinning effect and a positive test for CPN (or is this even an issue)?
User avatar
NHE
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:00 pm

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby NHE » Mon Aug 27, 2012 12:23 am

NHE wrote:
cheerleader wrote:milesap--David's wife Sarah posts on This Is MS as Anecdote---you can find lots of info in the antibiotic thread. Jeff did the NAC test and was negative. http://www.davidwheldon.co.uk/NAC.html


How does one distinguish between NAC's normal mucus thinning effect and a positive test for CPN (or is this even an issue)?


Another question... Wouldn't other thiol containing antioxidants, such as r-lipoic acid, be expected to have a similar effect on CPN?
User avatar
NHE
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:00 pm

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby AMcG » Mon Aug 27, 2012 3:52 pm

“The debate in the scientific community was brief, swift and is over,”

Sounds like the academic version of premature ejaculation. Properly designed research takes a bit longer. Perhaps someone should tell Hafler to calm down and take it slowly. Strange thing is it is always us they blame for getting over-excited!
User avatar
AMcG
Family Elder
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 3:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby 1eye » Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:54 pm

“The debate in the scientific community was brief, swift and is over,”


What was it, brief or swift? No debate here any more... it's all done. I'm convinced.

Premature academulation. Love it.
"Try - Just A Little Bit Harder" - Janis Joplin
CCSVI procedure Albany Aug 2010
'MS' is over - if you want it
Patients sans/without patience
User avatar
1eye
Family Elder
 
Posts: 3004
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: Kanata, Ontario, Canada

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby Robnl » Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am

http://www.jvir.org/article/S1051-0443% ... 7/abstract
Purpose

This study proposed to prospectively evaluate safety and clinical changes in outpatient endovascular treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI).
Materials and Methods

Two hundred fifty-nine patients with MS were followed with the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) before and for 1and 6 months after treatment of extracranial internal jugular vein and azygos vein stenoses and occlusions using venous angioplasty, as well as stent placement in 2.5% of patients. Before treatment, the patients were tested with magnetic resonance (MR) venography and flow quantification.
Results

We found statistically significant improvements in the MSIS-29 scores (P < .01) at both 1 and 6 months. At 1 and 6 months, 67.9% and 53.6% were improved on the physical scale, respectively, and 53.0% and 44.4% were improved on the psychological scale, respectively. Women showed greater improvement than did men on the physical scale at 6 months (P = .01). Patients with primary progressive MS (PPMS) showed less improvement than did those with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) on the psychological scale at 1 month, and venoplasty treatment of more vein sites versus fewer vein sites showed greater improvement on the physical scale at both 1 and 6 months. Fifteen patients (6.3%) reported recurrent symptoms after clinical improvement and were treated again. There was one serious adverse event, a deep venous thrombosis at the catheter insertion site, which resolved with treatment.

Conclusions

Endovascular treatment of CCSVI in patients with MS appears to be a safe procedure resulting in significant clinical improvement.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen:
User avatar
Robnl
Family Elder
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: New study challenges controversial MS treatment

Postby SarahLonglands » Sat Sep 01, 2012 7:02 am

NHE asked:
milesap--David's wife Sarah posts on This Is MS as Anecdote---you can find lots of info in the antibiotic thread. Jeff did the NAC test and was negative. http://www.davidwheldon.co.uk/NAC.html




How does one distinguish between NAC's normal mucus thinning effect and a positive test for CPN (or is this even an issue)?


I don't think that one can say that the NAC test is a positive test for C pn but simply that it is a lot more accurate than many lab tests. For instance, it is reliant on having elementary bodies which react by having their di-sulphide bonds broken. If at the particular time one only has reticular or cryptic bodies, this won't happen. Now, some people seem not to respond but the react very strongly to antibiotics: this is probbly because the reaction to NAC was only very subtle because of the lack of elementary bodies.

Of course, if someone has very bad congestion in their lungs, MAC is often used for thinning the mucus, but I guess most people know if they have this or not.

Also, hay fever sufferers like me are probably better off not trying it in the hay fever season!

As far as I know, other thiol containing antioxidants don't work this way: I don't know why.

Sarah
An Itinerary in Light and Shadow Completed Dr Charles Stratton / Dr David Wheldon abx regime for aggressive secondary progressive MS in June 2007, after four years. Still improving with no relapses since starting. Can't run but can paint all day.
SarahLonglands
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2126
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 2:00 pm
Location: Bedfordshire UK


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