This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

really it's all about faith not science. When the facts run out one guy sees an immune system that needs fixing and and another sees a healthy immune system (if over burdened) reacting to toxic buildup.



So what would be the indicators in the immune response that it is normal or broken?

Billmeik wrote:anna maria is better than this. She has been coached badly by some producer to have a skeptical attitude but she comes off as ignorant. Not knowing what restenosis is, etc.

Hi Billmeik, I perceived it rather that she asked the question so that those who watch and maybe would not know the term would get an explanation. I often realise, that we are so much involved in the topic, that I stimes do not realise when talking to outside parties certain terminologies could be unknown to them...

a good study would be to do an ultrasound on someone newly liberated with angio and makes sure restenosis occurs before the ms attack. How many days before? My wife says its not proof but I think with that we'd have proof..

I don't think she had ever heard of restenosis before, which she should have considering she should have researched the topic ahead of time. If she had known, she wouldn't have kept asking him what he was talking about, she would have said something like: "Dr Zamboni is talking about the reoccurrance of blockage to the vein, it's termed 'restenosis'." Instead, she was like: "huh? What? What are you trying to say? What's that? duh"
(That was my impression, not a quote)

Billmeik wrote:really it's all about faith not science. When the facts run out one guy sees an immune system that needs fixing and and another sees a healthy immune system (if over burdened) reacting to toxic buildup.



So what would be the indicators in the immune response that it is normal or broken?

Yes, and in relation to another interview from Zamboni (the one in parallel in Italian of Omninews Ontario), what can be considered as an "efficient therapy" that works with people that are not yet so much progressed...

Zamboni stated in this interview that he would recommend other people (the not so much progressed ones) that have "efficient treatment" to stay calm (implying they should wait), because further research will improve the technique.

On the other hand it was stated several times from experience Zamboni had and also that of the interventionist in Kuwait, that the less long-term progression and recent the damage seemed to be, the higher the improvement rate... Here the most recent statement from Sinan mentioned in the Kuwait article: "He says patients with more severe MS reported fewer improvements, but did notice feeling less stiffness and more energy. Those with less severe disease, reported up to 90 per cent improvements in their fatigue and numbness in their hands and leg."

Is this then a logical concept for anyone with MS? To recommend to wait for treatment (research will at least take 3-5 years), risking to progress?! We all know there is no medication that will stop progression 100% (the highest on currents meds in average is 40-45% reduction of progression in time and this is an average, as we all know, not working with everyone! And lets leave the side effects...) And many also do not take any therapy/medication at all... I am on a med with RR since 5 years and have not remained fully stable, but progressed slowly on certain lighter symptoms - so certainly not same shape of health as I was after "remission" of a relapse 4 years ago...RR can also turn into secondary+primary progressive, how can one know?

Is prevention not also a worthwile factor for ALL? And should in view of the positive risk-benefit analysis ratio for angioplasty, this then not be recommended for all???

whyRwehere wrote:I don't think she had ever heard of restenosis before, which she should have considering she should have researched the topic ahead of time. If she had known, she wouldn't have kept asking him what he was talking about, she would have said something like: "Dr Zamboni is talking about the reoccurrance of blockage to the vein, it's termed 'restenosis'." Instead, she was like: "huh? What? What are you trying to say? What's that? duh"
(That was my impression, not a quote)

OK, but that's weard, so unprepared not knowing even the basics...well...

she also seem to give menacing look to Dr Zamboni ... like what the **** are you talking about, not knowing he is talking about fundamental medicine terms, you dumbo!

This interviewer needs to find another career. She got sold by Freedman, didn't give Zamboni enough respect given his language difficulty, should not have asked so many questions re his wife, hadn't researched her subject and kept bashing on about hope and despair. She was probably a school teacher or social worker in a former life - someone who likes to be in charge but may not have the intellect to go with the authority.

Australia's (ABC) Kerry O'brien would have had Freedman on toast and probed far more into his work, and gone right into other trials and work going on re CCSVI. Even Stephen Colbert would have done better - at least it would be funny - asking Freedman about his pooh brown suit, interesting haircut and why he wasn't wearing his pink polka dot bow tie!

As for the MS patient - presumably he was carefully selected and was obviously in denial re his condition. They could have at least interviewed someone who has had the procedure and has something to tell.

Phil

I'm surprised no-one picked on Freedman's statement that MSers have over 50% placebo on treatments. He's reiterated it on other interviews since. I've never seen this figure before. I suspect he's simply trying to undermine the CCSVI reports of 60% +. Surely if there was a 50% placebo effect for MSers, this would bring all MS drugs into question, viz. Copaxone, Rebif, Avonex etc which operate at 30-40% efficiency, as I understand?

Also, there were a couple of good quotes on these interviews......

Zamboni said re CCSVI that "Rome was not built in a day" - neat, given his Italian heritage.

Freedman said that "MS sufferers were sick of being sick" - I sense he knows in his heart that CCSVI may be 'it', for perhaps many MSers.

Phil

Billmeik wrote:restenosis is the closest thing we have to an animal test for ccsvi. The fact that people had ms attacks and those were caused by restenosis is everything anna maria. Get it. Some day there will be animal tests where we clamp the veins on the output side of the brain and produce lesions, but until then its restenosis. That's the proof.

Why do we need the animal test for? restenosis is a natural control. Angioplasty trials can use the restenosis cases like controls and a controled human trial is always more reliable than an animal model.