This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Welcome to the world's leading forum on Multiple Sclerosis research, support, and knowledge. For over 10 years, This is MS has provided an unbiased community dedicated to Multiple Sclerosis patients, caregivers, and affected loved ones.
It is currently Tue May 21, 2013 7:57 am

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Treatments » Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI)

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 4
  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
scorpion
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 6:27 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:00 pm
Posts: 1323
Ok now I understand. Every neurologist who questions CCSVI is embarrassed they treated patients for years with medications that don't work. How embarrassing. Every neurologist who questions CCSVI is indebted to special interests. Could it be it just does not make scientific sense to them? Why do you guys get so angry when someone questions CCSVI????? Maybe Zamboni has something to lose by CCSVI being disproven????? Maybe there is someone named Dake in California getting really rich from his "corrective surgeries?" No way!!!!!! Thank God for Zamboni and Dake, the two "true" neuros who only really care about people with MS and not about their pride..
Top
 Profile  
 
Rokkit
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:38 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 3:00 pm
Posts: 669
Lyon wrote:
...odds alone dictate that it's not a couple of percentage points away from 100%.


I'm not trying to be combative, I just don't see where you've offered anything that supports this claim. But you could well be right, I can't prove you're not.

I look forward to the first "unblinding" of the Buffalo study in November. Hopefully it will clear up, one way or the other, this particular criticism of Zamboni's paper.

Lyon wrote:
Not to generalize because there are objective people involved with CCSVI but what I've stated was nothing more than obvious until some people decided that desperately twisting the "facts" to prove the merits of CCSVI was the highest goal.


I guess the implication here is I'm not one of the objective people. That's very true of course, as I sit here with stents in my jugulars, I'm obviously not unbiased. I don't think I'm trying to twist any facts though, I'm really just enjoying using my brain to try to unravel some of this while we wait for more definitive info. I'm not trying to get under anyone's skin.
Top
 Profile  
 
Lyon
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:26 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
.


Last edited by Lyon on Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
whyRwehere
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:52 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 3:00 pm
Posts: 900
The problem is, Lyon (Bob) just likes to argue. It's not really whether people can prove one thing or another...he just likes to wind people up and argue. I personally don't find his arguments witty, potent or relevant. Just a BORE.
Top
 Profile  
 
Lyon
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:25 am 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
.


Last edited by Lyon on Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Rokkit
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:40 am 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 3:00 pm
Posts: 669
Lyon wrote:
ONLY the diehard CCSVI proponents are suddenly claiming that MS diagnosis is 100% accurate.


I haven't seen anyone claim that. I'm only pointing out that it's not unthinkable that the rate of misdiagnosis in CDMS is low enough that Zamboni might have had 65 accurately diagnosed.

Yes, I am persistent on this point because in my opinion your criticism, although a very valid point, is still weak enough (without any data to back it up) that it deserves to be challenged.

You are right that your point was "only obvious" before. So consider this: If it was obvious to you, it was certainly obvious to Zamboni, yet he published it anyway. I would think that makes him either an idiot, or very confident.
Top
 Profile  
 
Lyon
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:54 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
.


Last edited by Lyon on Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
cheerleader
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:24 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:00 pm
Posts: 4676
Location: southern California
Dr. Zamboni's nine published papers in the last three years:

Quote:
"The big Idea: Iron-dependent inflammation in venous disease and proposed parallels in multiple sclerosis", 2006
in "The Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine" Vol. 99, pp. 589-593


"Intracranial Venous Haemodynamics in multiple Sclerosis", 2007
in "Current Neurovascular Research" ed. 4, pp. 252-258


"Doppler Haemodynamics of cerebral Venous Return", 2008
in "Current Neurovascular Research" ed. 5, pp. 260-265


"The value of cerebral Doppler venous haemodynamics in the assessment of multiple sclerosis", 2009
in "Journal of the Neurological Sciences"


"Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency in patients with multiple sclerosis", 2009
in "Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry"ed. 80, pp. 392-399


"Rationale and preliminary results of endovascular treatment of multiple sclerosis, the liberation procedure", 2009
in "1978-2009 -31 years- Vascular and Endovascular Controversies Update" 31° International Symposium - CX Charing Cross, pp. 71-79

"Endovascular Treatment for Multiple Sclerosis", maggio 2009
in "Vascular News" ed. 80, pp. 392-399

"Venous Collateral Circulation of the Extracranial Cerebrospinal Outflow Routes"
in "Current Neurovascular Research" Volume 6, Number 3, August 2009


"Anomalous venous blood flow and iron deposition in multiple sclerosis"
in "Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism", September 2 2009


http://www.fondazionehilarescere.org/en ... zioni.html

And now, back to the Italian MS Society....
cheer

_________________
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
dual stents placed 5/09
CCSVI in MS


Top
 Profile  
 
Rokkit
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:38 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 3:00 pm
Posts: 669
cheerleader wrote:
And now, back to the Italian MS Society....


Yeah, sorry about that. Totally my fault.
Top
 Profile  
 
patientx
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:44 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 1068
Lyon wrote:
but it would be a great help if he would just put his reasons for confidence on paper, and that's really not too much for the rest of the world to ask.


I would have to agree, Bob. The 100% thing seems to be a big sticking point for skeptical neurologists, and it would be nice if this, among other issues, was addressed.
Top
 Profile  
 
Lyon
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:58 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
.


Last edited by Lyon on Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
cheerleader
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 4:26 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:00 pm
Posts: 4676
Location: southern California
Here's Dr. Zivadinov (SUNY Buffalo) speaking about CCSVI. There is the unblinding of the first part of Jacobs study next month...(maybe your wife's testing will be part of the first results, Bob?)

Dr. Zivadinov speaks about CCSVI

The Liberation paper is "in press" at the Vascular Journal. We just have to wait as the research unfolds. I was just showing how much work has gone into this already. As Dr. Zivadinov said in Bologna, there will be thousands of papers regarding CCSVI in the next ten years.

Back to the Italian MS Society (back OT)....if people want to wait for further studies and use caution as the MS Society suggests that's great! If they can wait two, ten, twenty years, they are very fortunate. If others want to be tested for CCSVI now and talk/write about it, that's their right, as well.
cheer

_________________
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
dual stents placed 5/09
CCSVI in MS


Top
 Profile  
 
Lyon
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 4:33 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
.


Last edited by Lyon on Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
patientx
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:03 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 1068
Rokkit wrote:
cheerleader wrote:
And now, back to the Italian MS Society....


Yeah, sorry about that. Totally my fault.


Funny, when I look at the main page for this forum, I only see one name listed as moderator.
Top
 Profile  
 
mrhodes40
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:05 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 2066
Location: USA
http://www.neurologyreviews.com/sep00/n ... emmas.html

Quote:
Finding alternative causes in patients with classic symptoms and no atypical features was, in Dr. Cohen's experience, "very unusual." For patients in whom multiple sclerosis has already been established, he cautioned colleagues to be vigilant to overlying pathologies that might be contributing to symptoms and to always evaluate the main source of a patient's disability.



My neuro confirmed that it is extremely unusual for a person who is CDMS--meaning specifically the pattern is established and typical (newly diagnosed persons are different) to discover later they do not have MS.

The Z study had inclusion criteria for CDMS...
(sorry I was working on this already)

_________________
I'm not offering medical advice, I am just a patient too! Talk to your doctor about what is best for you...
http://www.thisisms.com/ftopic-7318-0.html This is my regimen thread
http://www.ccsvibook.com Read my book published by McFarland Health topics


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 4
  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Board index » Treatments » Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI)

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. The Italian MS Society rejects the funding to Brave Dreams

masci

4

558

Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:30 pm

MrSuccess View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Italian MS Society seeks to discredit CCSVI theory

vesta

2

578

Sun Oct 21, 2012 8:27 am

phlebologist View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Response from Canadian MS Society Re: CCSVI

[ Go to pageGo to page: 1, 2, 3 ]

ms07

32

6419

Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:02 pm

MrSuccess View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Dr. Embry's response to Dr. Zivadinov's response

Cece

0

798

Thu Apr 21, 2011 5:30 pm

Cece View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. CCSVI Society sued by MS Society in Italy

Cece

3

655

Tue May 15, 2012 5:00 pm

1eye View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: