Money for Mayo

bromley · Post by **bromley** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 7:38 am

http://c.moreover.com/click/here.pl?j399728675&w=464753

I'd like to commission a piece of research along the lines of - how can researchers spend $X00 million and still not have a definitive answer as to what causes MS and how it can be effectively treated.

I really get the impression that MS was invented to keep researchers in a job.

Bromley

Brownsfan · Post by **Brownsfan** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 5:44 pm

Actually from what I can tell, the Mayo Clinic seems to be the only research hospital that is making any progress with the disease. Dr. Moses Rodriguez especially seems to be doing great work and providing patients with insight not available from their neurologists. For example, the Mayo Clinic now advocates a possible "wait and see approach" for those with minor symptoms whereas most other neuros will advocate starting the CRABS ASAP.

<shortened url>

OddDuck · Post by **OddDuck** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 3:11 am

I believe I would support the Mayo, also, with the wait-and-see attitude.

Deb

Brownsfan · Post by **Brownsfan** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 5:27 am

OddDuck, I've read several Mayo studies that suggest MS may not be as debilitating as once thought and that patients may want to try a wait and see approach. However, all my neuros have pushed the CRABS ASAP, even though I had my first symptom of peripheral double vision in April 2000 and didn't have any other symptoms until this past July in the form of some leg numbness. It seems to me that I've had MS for 5 years and have had 2 attacks and no disability. I'm reluctant to start injecting myself but that is what the medical community is saying I need to do.

Anyway, this leaves patients very conflicted and confused about treatment. Do I believe the Mayo Clinic or every other neuro I've seen? Seems ridiculous that there is no consensus in the medical community.

thanks