Arron / Harry,
I am of the opposite view which is as follows:
LDN, Aimspro and ABX are all drugs / treatments that have not been tested in MS for safety or effectiveness. The CRAB drugs have been tested and although their efficacy is not great, it is known, and so is the safety profile.
I wouldn't have expected Prof Murray to say anything different, and Dr Coles in the UK has come out with the same views. Love them. or loathe them, neuros are professional doctors who have the patients best interest in hand. If you have a car you take it to the main dealer and he replaces whatever part is needed. Would you fit a part made by your neighbour in his garden because a few said it seemed to work OK?
I have seen reports of LDN being useful - but was does this mean? Slowing / stopping progression, reductions in EDSS, reduced disease activity? How many are taking it, how many are seeing benefits, are these benefits real / validated?
The same questions could be applied to ABX and Aimspro.
Neuros working in this field must have seen numerous examples of drugs etc which had not been tested and where great results were being reported. But I suspect that they all came to nothing.
I think there's a bit of a myth that neuros are pushing the CRAB drugs and show no interest in alternative treatments etc. I can see why those with partners diagnosed 20 or 30 years ago must feel completely let down by this specialism. But imagine if a neuro didn't suggest a licensed and tested drug and areed to prescibe an untested treatment. Imagine if that patient went down hill very quickly. How would the neuro defend himself / herself at the tribunal - "you let your patient take an untested drug, with its effectiveness based on hearsay".
So I support Prof Murray. And at the end of the decade when more effective, tested MS therapies are avialable, will continue to support this view, until drugs such as LDN have been properly tested and approved.
If LDN was so good - stopping progression, stopping relapses, then the CRAB manufacturers would be out of business. Unfortuantely, with this cruel disease people are putting their hope and money into drugs which have not been tested or approved. Bee Stings have been proven to be of no use, and I believe that LDN and Aimspro will have similar outcomes. In the case of LDN I'd like to be proven wrong and will give $100 to thisisms, if proved wrong.
Apologies if this comes across somewhat harsh but I met Dr Coles at Cambridge yesterday and you start to appreciate how complex this disease is and the work going on behind the scenes. I think it's an insult to these people that all you need is a pharmacist knocking out capsules of drugs which have not been test for efficacy or safety. And the real risk is that patients may be tempted off licenced and tested drugs and sometime down the line realise that they made a dreadful mistake, by not following the advice of their doctor.
So a different view - but that's the beauty of this site.
PS Unlike HarryZ I have no financial interest in any drugs companies. I understand that HARRYZARRON Inc have recently purchased the rights to distribute and sell LDN in the US and Europe.