This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

It was a good question (and got a great answer), I was happy to help.

But please do not call me your assistant.

http://www.crhp.net/article1.html

I think this is a pretty relevant article.

le sigh.

jimmylegs wrote:le sigh.

Did that comment add anything relevant to the debate?



just kidding

..

jimmylegs, I think we're doing ok?



It's better to address skepticism and skeptics in a thread specific to it, than having the conversation in every thread every where.

So, what of the charge that some of this skepticism is polemic?

wikipedia wrote:A polemic (pronounced /pəˈlɛmɪk/) is a variety of argument or controversy made against one opinion, doctrine, or person. Other variations of argument are debate and discussion. The word is derived from the Greek polemikos (πολεμικός), meaning "warlike, hostile".

A polemic is a form of dispute, wherein the main efforts of the disputing parties are aimed at establishing the superiority of their own points of view regarding an issue. Along with debate, polemic is one of the more common forms of dispute. Similar to debate, it is constrained by a definite thesis which serves as the subject of controversy. However, unlike debate, which may seek common ground between two parties, a polemic is intended to establish the supremacy of a single point of view by refuting an opposing point of view.

Polemic usually addresses serious matters of religious, philosophical, political, or scientific importance, and is often written to dispute or refute a widely accepted position

Cece wrote:
Polemic usually addresses serious matters of religious, philosophical, political, or scientific importance, and is often written to dispute or refute a widely accepted position

CCSVI might be a widely accepted position on this board, but to the rest of the world and the medical esablishment CCSVI is refuting a widely accepted position, and I've read many polemical pieces directed towards the medical establishment, neurologists, etc.

Surely there is some polemicizing on both sides of issue, although I think saying "we don't know" and "it's absolutely positively true" aren't exactly opposite sides of the issue.

And I think we could agree that there are certain trends on this board that could maybe use some polemicizing, like the idea that stents prevent restenosis, although there is currently no data about patency, etc. Not to mention some of the horrible complications that have happened with stents so far and the recent death from stent complications.

please clarify, sorry if i'm out of the loop, but... what fatality from stent migration?

concerned, I think the widely accepted position is that stenoses are abnormal.

I have not heard of any fatality from stent migration....I hope this is not true?

Well, as I understand it the family is asking people for time to grieve before they give an account of what happened but it was a young man from Ontario I believe who was treated in Costa Rica.

Maybe it wasn't stent migration, I thought I read that somewhere...

EDIT: The internet says: "stent complications"

In St. Catharines a man who had the CCSVI treatment was told: ”You have MS. Go home there is nothing we can do for you.” Sadly he died in Costa Rica seeking follow-up care that he was denied back in Canada.

a TIMS member is the only case i know of who suffered stent migration but to my knowledge it was not fatal.

I guess it was just "stent complications"... will edit.


happy canuck said:
"A post on Facebook yesterday reported a young man died last week from stent complications after being treated for CCSVI in June. The person who posted it was a neighbour who had raised money for the man to return to his treatment location when problems started. She reported he sought help at both his doctor's office and local hospital in St. Catharine's, Ontario and was turned away"

What some of the more sensible skeptics should realize that for a significant portion of MS patients, and many of those posting here, that CCSVI isn't so much a theorem to be debated, as it is a political movement and a patient revolt.

For many, the information that's out there is proof enough and all these further studies are roadblocks and delays thrown down by the reactionary neurology-biased, drug-funded MS establishment.

To these individuals, your reasoned questions and desire for further studies are gum and muck under their feet. Don't stand in the doorways, don't block up the halls.

I have to admit, there's some attraction in that.

To others, acceptance of CCSVI is an article of science not faith and they'll debate you all you want, and thank-you for creating a polemic to deepen their knowledge.

Still you skeptics have to realize that skepticism will only take you so far. At some point continuous doubt and need for proof of everything results in opportunities, cures, life passing you by. At some point you have to make a reasoned choice and go with your best bet and try to make it work. And then learn from your mistakes and look for new opportunities.

Zamboni has shaken up the MS world. From such circumstances all sorts of possibilities, new angles, new light on tired ideas, arise for the bold and circumspect alike.

I fear this shall end in tears. It's sad to see stories here of people with mild cases of Ms worse off after the angioplasty. If a skeptical viewpoint is not communicated how many naive ms patients will rush into a procedure that thus far has not been tested for safety let alone efficacy.

dreddk wrote:I fear this shall end in tears. It's sad to see stories here of people with mild cases of Ms worse off after the angioplasty. If a skeptical viewpoint is not communicated how many naive ms patients will rush into a procedure that thus far has not been tested for safety let alone efficacy.

This sums up my concerns pretty damn well. I'm happy to wait until this particular problem can be explained.
If I was progressing rapidly and nothing was slowing this, then I'd be pleading and pushing for testing and treatment - locally, nah, that's not true, I'd be off to Poland.

We can discuss this surely?
Why are people who just wish to discuss this being lumped together as some sort of malevolant group?
I'm sure we aren't.
Cece- thanks, but my friend says she's had enough and it's just too expensive to try again. She's working on her fitness and blood flow and giving it a few more months to heal/settle down.