I've heard people mention that researchers time would be better spent designing treatments for progressive MS and it really does seem that is true. Sadly, because 85% of the patients have RRMS and that is where the vast majority of treatment profits stand to be made, designing RRMS treatments is all that anyone has ever been able to bring themselves to focus on.
You continually refer to the 85% figure that is supposed to be the percentage of people with MS. It is driving me crazy because the statement is not true.
From the MNSS web site, the following statements are what is really said on the site:
"Approximately 85% of people are initially diagnosed with relapsing-remitting MS.
Following an initial period of relapsing-remitting MS, many people develop a secondary-progressive disease course in which the disease worsens more steadily, with or without occasional flare-ups, minor recoveries (remissions), or plateaus. Before the disease-modifying medications became available, approximately 50% of people with relapsing-remitting MS developed this form of the disease within 10 years. Long-term data are not yet available to determine if treatment significantly delays this transition."
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/about- ... index.aspx
In other words, 85% of the patients start out with a RRMS diagnosis. Then 50% of those patients transition to SPMS. Overall, there are a lot more people with SPMS and PPMS than RRMS because many of us have been around eons and keep adding to the progressive types.
So the companies need to stop repeating their useless back patting trials to determine if their product is better than the other guys and get on with some research that will help all of us. It reminds me of kindergarten kids trying to determine at recess whose is longer.