.
Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 1:47 pm
.
Welcome to This is MS, the leading forum for Multiple Sclerosis research and support. Join our friendly community of patients, caregivers, and researchers celebrating over 20 years of delivering hope through knowledge.
https://www.thisisms.com/forum/
Too f-ing late."We need to work together to encourage a united message for the MS world," said Burks.
I am not sure why we need to convince the neurologists. "Registries might work"? Bring on the registries. I believe as the IRs gain skill at the CCSVI procedure, the neurologists will see the benefits in their own patients. Progressive patients are the most clinically convincing, if functions expected to be lost forever are regained.During the session, Zamboni suggested the evidence of the many observational studies might be sufficient to convince interventionalists and MS experts of the treatment benefits, but the perception right now is that only a randomized, controlled, clinical trial will be good enough to convince the neurological community. Dr Martin Leon (Columbia University, New York), a member of the panel discussing the treatment, agreed. While registries might work, a randomized, controlled trial is needed to convince everybody, he said
Both you and Colin Rose should know better. Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA) examines the arteries. Of course it's not going to pick up any problems with the veins. That's pretty obvious. It's likely that Mr. Rose is just using this medical terminology in order to sound authoratative.Lyon wrote:I hadn't noticed the lone comment earlier.
Dr Rose wrote:# 1 of 1
January 24, 2011 02:37 (EST)
Colin Rose
"CCSVI" is junk science.
There are now at least four published studies using magnetic resonance angiography showing the "CCSVI" does not exist. Blockages in neck veins of any sort do not raise intracerebral pressure and, therefore, cannot cause brain pathology. The "liberation" treatment, dilation of internal jugular stenoses, is a very profitable scam.
No more time or money should be wasted on this charlatanry
where is the like button?zinamaria wrote:The topic of this thread is misleading. Interventionalists, such as Dr. Sclafani, are not treating MS, they are treating CCSVI.
z
To me it's logical to separate the two.Lyon wrote:Consider that the following is taken straight from the CCSVI.org site, it's not believable that trying to distance CCSVI from MS is anything more than a smoke screen
If we want to find success stories we can click on the many posted stories on the CCSVI thread however if we want to read about the cases where "liberation" did nothing there is a single thread at the top of the forum where people are "allowed" to post their results. No one can make heads or tails about what is called CCSVI and the liberation procedure because of the miracle stories of people walking after having no use of their legs for tens years, people running marathons after not being able to run 100 yards, etc. that are skewing reality. The researchers involved hope that the liberation procedure helps alleviate some symptoms of MS, specifically fatigue and cog fog. It looks like the myth of a "miraculous cure" is being perpetuated through the internet and it is a shame because if there is anything positive about being treated for CCSVI how in the world will we ever know????CCSVIhusband wrote:Who cares?
What's your point with this thread?
Ask the people around the world (thousands now) who have had CCSVI liberation ... see how many would recommend it to others with venous issues and MS ...
I think you'll find a bunch of very satisfied customers - and customer feedback - regardless of "GREAT" improvements in MS symptoms or not ...
I think that's the true test. Those with "MS" who were liberated.
Why do you feel YOU should tell people what to do? Considering you have no experience with MS, in combination with CCSVI, and seem to dismiss everyone who has experience with both ... ???
Just curious .... maybe I should change my name to "curious"?
www.ccsvi.org"In my view, venous obstruction is a promoter for MS, like many other things are promoters for MS .... but what has people excited (about CCSVI) is that this promoter is reversible."
Professionals in the field seem to be able to use the MRA/MRV thing interchangeably, as in this article: http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/1_99/0094.htmlNHE wrote:Both you and Colin Rose should know better. Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA) examines the arteries. Of course it's not going to pick up any problems with the veins. That's pretty obvious. It's likely that Mr. Rose is just using this medical terminology in order to sound authoratative.Lyon wrote:I hadn't noticed the lone comment earlier.
Dr Rose wrote:# 1 of 1
January 24, 2011 02:37 (EST)
Colin Rose
"CCSVI" is junk science.
There are now at least four published studies using magnetic resonance angiography showing the "CCSVI" does not exist. Blockages in neck veins of any sort do not raise intracerebral pressure and, therefore, cannot cause brain pathology. The "liberation" treatment, dilation of internal jugular stenoses, is a very profitable scam.
No more time or money should be wasted on this charlatanry
NHE