Revisiting the past won't take nearly as long as it did the first time and we likely now have the technology
Definitely so, Bob. I look on it as re-examining the evidence of a crime many years later, using the latest forensic technology to spot clues that were previously missed -- to do this effectively you must bring fresh minds to bear uncluttered by preconceived notions or prejudiced by "current knowledge".
I had a conversation years ago with a friend of mine who is a gay activist, and he was of the opinion that because HIV apparently tended to strike young men, and can be detected before they had any symptoms so that they still felt well enough to be angry, that explained why HIV was so much more high-profile and high pressure than MS. I think there is much more to it than that: HIV was a sudden, new disease which threatened everybody; MS has been lurking quietly in the corner for a long time, it has no media-friendly glamour attached to it, and there is no perceived threat to the main population. Also it is burdened with its history -- when the foundations of "currently accepted wisdom" were laid down when medical science was in its infancy, any misunderstandings or misreadings were built into the very fabric of what we think we know today.
it does not matter what the % of men is to women. There is obviously a hormonal effect at play
We'll have to disagree on this one. Isn't the very existence of such a powerful sex bias one of the reasons that the hormonal effect is so "obvious"? I don't believe we should ignore any clues, especially one which appears so dramatically significant.
taking off on tangents that don't lead to knowledge that will really help us.
The history of scientific and medical knowledge is littered with chance discoveries and breakthroughs made by people going off on the wildest of tangents: only today I've read of the discovery that the active ingredients in dandruff shampoo may help to open potassium channels in the neurons of people with epilepsy, (okay, strictly speaking this wasn't a chance discovery: they were looking for it, but you get what I mean).
The only way we will ever know which were dead-ends and which were useful lines of enquiry will be after this is over and we can all heave a huge sigh of relief, sit back, and smile wryly as we look back with hindsight at all the hundreds of ideas which have been considered, when all along it was simply.........