This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

CCSVIhusband wrote:

fernando wrote:

concerned wrote:Certainly, some of these doctors who are "the very best in their field" are saying the science just isn't there and that RCT's are needed to see if "Liberation" has any benefit.

My friend you keep moving the line. Let's get to the first comment: It is not that there is "no science" behind CCSVI, it is a matter of debate right now - that what science is. And in this debate there are top doctors on both sides. Haacke for example.

In the meantime people make choices and the DOCTORS are who intervene.

You got the part about moving the line right ... as I've always asked, when is it EVER going to be enough?

It won't be ... and there's a reason they keep moving the line. It's easier that way if you have an agenda or already formed notion ... but again the evidence will continue to mount through 2011 (animal model studies, double blind studies, more and more knowledge, doctors, forums, procedures, results) ... the tidal wave is building ... it will crash down on these skeptics soon and leave them waiting in LONG lines of people hoping to be liberated.

Dead on Fernando.

I have been told this for over a year now and so far I all I have heard is nothing but a lot of noise from people with big egos. Sounds good but so far nada.

^ thought you were ignoring me ... I guess the truth is too much for you to not respond to.

Even YOU have to acknowledge it's coming ... double blind trials at MANY locations ... animal models. Come on you're not dumb ... you can see it coming. This many doctors don't get involved if they don't truly see something legit there ... they don't waste time and money and frustration like that.

They're up to almost 18,000 followers on CCSVI facebook ... a lot more than read this page. As soon as this hits the main news in the US ... just wait and see what happens.

If you don't have the foresight to see those things ... well then, don't cry when you're stuck in a 2 year line later on waiting to see (insert local IR here - I mean heck, at this point YOU could get in a double blind study about CCSVI if you wanted to - so why aren't you exactly???) - oh, preformed notion or some other agenda ... right, I remember now.

CCSVIhusband wrote: double blind trials at MANY locations ... animal models. Come on you're not dumb ... you can see it coming. This many doctors don't get involved if they don't truly see something legit there ... they don't waste time and money and frustration like that.

There's a lot more in double blinded trials and animal models of MS in the autoimmune model, and many more doctors think that it's legit. I don't see how that would be evidence in favor of CCSVI theory.
Lots of doctors get involved in lots of animal models and double blind trials that end up being wrong turns or dead ends, and there is even a doctor on this board who trained in something called "Applied Kinesiology", however, I'm not inclined to find any of those things probable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_kinesiology

concerned wrote:

CCSVIhusband wrote: double blind trials at MANY locations ... animal models. Come on you're not dumb ... you can see it coming. This many doctors don't get involved if they don't truly see something legit there ... they don't waste time and money and frustration like that.

There's a lot more in double blinded trials and animal models of MS in the autoimmune model, and many more doctors think that it's legit. I don't see how that would be evidence in favor of CCSVI theory.
Lots of doctors get involved in lots of animal models and double blind trials that end up being wrong turns or dead ends, and there is even a doctor on this board who trained in something called "Applied Kinesiology", however, I'm not inclined to find any of those things probable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_kinesiology

That's it ... keep moving the line ... ... your agenda and bias becomes more clear every day.

It's actually more and more amusing ... even more than "engaging" you

rules of the board
http://www.thisisms.com/ftopicp-124994.html#124994

If you disagree with someone, please succinctly state why and let it go at that. Point, counterpoint, counter-counter point, etc. is not useful-- the reality is that after the first disagreement, you will rarely convince another of something they feel strongly about unless you have shocking new information to share. The drawn-out debates also turn people off from reading the messages in the first place. If you really have to get something off your chest, please send that person a Private Message-- there is no need to have a long argument in public.