Lyon wrote:Hi Finn,
Not trying to start an argument and admittedly my foundation is a clinical trial which is still in progress and can't really be considered "fact" but if what you mention stands any chance of being correct, what is to be made of the results found in the Tovaxin clinical trials?
you know me, there's nothing like a good argument. Besides, with only Ian and you ThisIsMS would turn into an "autoimmune consensus board" in no time ;-)
Seriously, I do believe that preventing demyelination with drugs like Tovaxin (or Campath) may be beneficial in RRMS (at least in the short term and to some extend), but is it able to halt the progression of MS for good? I personally don't think so. And according to trial results published so far, either of the drugs has been able to completely prevent symptoms from occurring. But they definitely seem to be more effective than any of the current treatments studied in double blinded clinical trials. Equally effective (in SPMS) seems to be only MBP8298.
Lyon wrote:In the entire history of MS research there is much that has been suspected but little or nothing which could be considered undeniable fact.
Yes, including autoimmunity, and the idea of inflammation being the driving force of the disease.
Lyon wrote:Considering the results they've been finding, I don't see how those results could do anything but prove that, at least in RRMS, removing the myelin reactive T cells from circulation has a profound effect on lesion formation and disability progression, at least out to the point that people have been treated so far....6 or 8 years??
So you're saying that all patients treated with Tovaxin for a longer period of time have been in complete remission during that time?
Anyway, I guess you're right, this is a wrong thread for this kind of argument. I'll try to find the extra time and energy to post more of my arguments in the Inflammation vs. neurodegeneration thread :-)