GiCi wrote:Skepticism is certainly useful, especially in the clinical field, because it avoids unjustified enthusiasm for unproven theories.
Skeptics about the endovascular treatment of MS should probably bother to read the papers published by prof. Zamboni and his team. It seems to me an unlikely coincidence that they found a defective venous drainage from the brain, due to congenital anomalies of the jugular and/or the azygos veins, in 100% of the patients with proven MS. No such anomalies were found in the control group of healthy persons or patients with other neurological conditions. The first man who said that the earth was not flat was put in chains.
I am off to Bologna and I hope that subsequently more people will believe that the earth is a sphere.
Personally I find the ridiculing and bashing by TIMS members of someone who has been through the interventional procedure and benefited from it offensive.
dignan wrote:OK, I'm going to write this, then dive into the nearest fox-hole to take cover.
On one hand, the "skeptics" are saying that CCSVI looks like something with great potential, but more work is needed. I haven't seen any comments from TIMS members saying they think CCSVI is a crock. I might have missed something though...
On the other hand, those taking action on CCSVI take the comments of the skeptics as personal attacks because they have seen enough evidence to convince them to undergo a significant surgical procedure and to say that more evidence is needed is, in a way, calling their judgement into question.
If I could up-vote this post I would. Can we all just agree that CCSVI looks very promising to some people and that we all want more research to be done to look into it further?
Users browsing this forum: jackD