dignan wrote:Finn, I think you point out the extreme difference between responders and non-responders to this treatment. Responders: no progression, no relapses, no lesions. Non-responders: dead.
dignan wrote:Now if only they can figure out why some people do well and other people die, we'd be getting somewhere. It would seem that it isn't the actual procedure that kills people any more as I don't believe any MS patients have died from autologous stem cell transplant complications for the last few years.
HarryZ wrote:Thanks for posting that summary of one kind of stem cell therapy for MS.
HarryZ wrote:One of these days, the researchers are going to abandon the theory that MS is an auto-immune disease and that it is the patient's immune system which is reacting to some far more sinister "process" that is taking place within the brain.
These are complicated issues. It's been interesting to follow the change in the way mainstream researchers see the pathology of MS. Instead of new autoimmune theories, now we can read more open minded comments about it. Actually, Dom just posted one a while ago.
Hi Harry,HarryZ wrote: One of these days, the researchers are going to abandon the theory that MS is an auto-immune disease and that it is the patient's immune system which is reacting to some far more sinister "process" that is taking place within the brain. When that happens, perhaps there will be some real progress made in finding the answer.
I have no loyalties and will sway whichever way the facts point....but the "fact" part is kind of important.Clinical progression after HSCT has not been documented in the patients studied here; this may be due to the fact that survival times were 2 months or less in three of the five cases presented here.
Hi Harry,HarryZ wrote: I've followed the auto-immune theories for decades now and where has that lead MS research...no known cause and certainly no decent treatments. Will looking down another path bring us closer to the answer any time soon? Let's just say that I doubt it could be any worse than following the auto-immune route for the last 40 years!!
Hi Frank,Frank wrote:ThisIsMS Thread: Why do relpases go
Its basic question is: Why would the immune-system stop its attack if the pathogen (Mylin) is still present.
Maybe the threads title was not the best wording
Hi Harry,HarryZ wrote: That's all I feel is that after watching this work go on for 40+ years, MS patients have been given little if anything to celebrate about. Symptom control is much better than what it was but beyond that, not much else. Powerful anti-cancer drugs being tested on MS patients, stem cell work designed to re-start the person's immune system, monoclonal antibodies to prevent the immune system from working normally and oral interferons are still catching the headlines. I really wonder if much has changed!!
Multiple sclerosis is a disease in which patients develop inflammation in the brain resulting in damage to nerves. Campath-1H is a known treatment for multiple sclerosis that reduces inflammation. New research suggests this treatment may also help repair damaged nerves. This project involves investigating the function of white blood cells from patients treated with Campath-1H. A series of laboratory techniques will be used to determine if the cells of treated patients work to enhance nerve growth. By clarifying the effect of Campath-1H on nerve growth and repair, this work will contribute to the development of future treatments for multiple sclerosis.
Don't get me wrong, I share a lot of your concerns, but despite everything else it's hard to overlook one thing you mentioned, the seemingly obvious alteration of the disease course by resetting the immune system over the long term if not permenantly. How is that possible if it's not slapping the immune system back in line, and if slapping the immune system back in line has such an effect doesn't that have to mean that the immune system was out of line in the first place?
There is a lot about the autoimmune theory that I can't shape into a complete picture of MS. In a lot of ways life would be easier for me if there weren't reason to believe that MS is autoimmune but there are just enough smatterings of undeniable proofs which make it too hard NOT to believe it.
I think Finn mentioned earlier that none of us should be too engrained with any certain theories because in the end the truth of the matter is probably going to encompass a mixture of factors which we can't even envision at this point.
I know Mr Z isn't a big fan of the monoclonal anti-bodies (although no-one complains when they are used to treat cancer),
Users browsing this forum: scdiva81