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 Sat May 18, 2013 11:57 pm


All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Mormons and MS...
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 8:51 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 599
Location: Northamptonshire, England.
Pretty vague reference to a 'healthy lifestyle'; I wonder where Alan Osmond went wrong?

tinyURL

Dom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:16 am 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
I'm not sure what they mean by "lower than expected".

Seems to me that 45-64/100,000 is just about what should be expected??

Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:30 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 599
Location: Northamptonshire, England.
Bob,
Last figure I read for the U.S. was 91.7 per 100,000, but estimates vary so wildly you can more or less take your pick,

Dom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:58 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
You are absolutely right Dom. MS researcher are kind of like TV weather announcers. They always leave enough of a "fudge factor" that it's impossible to ever prove them wrong.

I typed "ms incidence" into google and the first site (wrongdiagnosis.com) mentioned 1/700, which doesn't do me a lot of good because math isn't my forte. I am sometimes able to count all the way to 21...when I'm willing to risk arrest for public indecency.....again.

The next site (neurologychannel.com) quoted "northern United States have the highest prevalence, with more than 30 cases per 100,000 people."

Most sources estimate that there are around 400,000 cases of MS in the US and the population of the US is about.......a whole bunch. A whole bunch divided by 400,000 is just about 91.7 per 100,000 exactly.....if my math is correct :lol:
Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 4:06 am 
Offline
Volunteer Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 2701
Lyon wrote:
I typed "ms incidence" into google and the first site (wrongdiagnosis.com) mentioned 1/700, which doesn't do me a lot of good because math isn't my forte. I am sometimes able to count all the way to 21...when I'm willing to risk arrest for public indecency.....again.

1/700 would be the same as 142/100,000.

NHE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:10 am 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
NHE wrote:
1/700 would be the same as 142/100,000.
Thanks NHE. That really is quite a range. I was trying to pick on Dom, but I guess I shouldn't have. There is no correct source.
Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:50 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 599
Location: Northamptonshire, England.
The key word here is "estimates". The figures are taken from a variety of sources, not just medical records: some are taken from regional MS Society membership and then averaged out, so it's no wonder we don't have any definitive numbers.

A little maths lesson, Bob: "a bunch" is the square root of "loads" divided by "quite a few"... I thought everyone knew that,

Dom .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:58 am 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 6063
TwistedHelix wrote:
A little maths lesson, Bob: "a bunch" is the square root of "loads" divided by "quite a few"... I thought everyone knew that,
Dom .
I got out of school quite a few years ago and I thought maybe the rules of mathmatics had changed since then.

When I was in school the the "periodic chart of elements" only contained 3 elements. Dirt, water and air and at that point scientists were still arguing whether or not water was just a form of thicker air.

Gosh, I hope it's only you and I who believe this natter!
Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


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: