Should the sponsors of the BNAC trial fiasco be refunded!
Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:15 pm
The post below is one I have sent to many News Papers and other commentors on the BNAC Trial, as well as to BNAC directly;
Should the sponsors of the BNAC trial fiasco be refunded!
BNAC IR's and Neurologists fail in Phase 2 of their sponsored Trial of PTA treatment to resolve CCSVI in MS patients and most significantly fail to meet their stated targets of treatment.
The Phase 1 success of treatment went unmentioned? Why?
The most concern around the Globe comes from the fear mongering and sensationalism of the Staff of BNAC's press releases that have no Scientific basis.
Is there an influence from another Industry or is there Integrity and Honesty challenges within BNAC?
The Vascular involvement is common in MS (see links below) and warrants treating so that the outcomes can be assessed and understanding of QOL improvements will define the need to have PTA treatment for all PwMS that test positive for CCSVI!
*** The recent BNAC trial/study (Phase 2) shows that there is not a Placebo effect from PTA treatment and that Under treating/dilating/PTA does not change the restrictions and potential reflux and back flow which challenges the BBB's ability to secure the Brain from damage and infections.
The finding of slow and low flow blood through the brains (aorta to jugglar) is also a common finding in MS and has known for many years, yet denied by Neurologists for many decades since the concept of managing the immune system was proposed by Drug Manufacturers.
One of many studies over time of the blood flow phenomena in PwMS,
(http://www.vasculab.it/hemodyn2011/pane ... seases.pdf)
Also
This study published in 2011 reminds us that the operator dependant Doppler testing when done by ONE person with lots of experience returns positive findings of CCSVI in 91.5% of PwMS.
An independent study at the University of Milan, utilizing Zamboni doppler protocol--
published in ACTA Phlebology
http://www.minervamedica.it/en/journals ... 11N02A0109
Should the sponsors of the BNAC trial fiasco be refunded!
BNAC IR's and Neurologists fail in Phase 2 of their sponsored Trial of PTA treatment to resolve CCSVI in MS patients and most significantly fail to meet their stated targets of treatment.
The Phase 1 success of treatment went unmentioned? Why?
The most concern around the Globe comes from the fear mongering and sensationalism of the Staff of BNAC's press releases that have no Scientific basis.
Is there an influence from another Industry or is there Integrity and Honesty challenges within BNAC?
The Vascular involvement is common in MS (see links below) and warrants treating so that the outcomes can be assessed and understanding of QOL improvements will define the need to have PTA treatment for all PwMS that test positive for CCSVI!
*** The recent BNAC trial/study (Phase 2) shows that there is not a Placebo effect from PTA treatment and that Under treating/dilating/PTA does not change the restrictions and potential reflux and back flow which challenges the BBB's ability to secure the Brain from damage and infections.
The finding of slow and low flow blood through the brains (aorta to jugglar) is also a common finding in MS and has known for many years, yet denied by Neurologists for many decades since the concept of managing the immune system was proposed by Drug Manufacturers.
One of many studies over time of the blood flow phenomena in PwMS,
(http://www.vasculab.it/hemodyn2011/pane ... seases.pdf)
Also
This study published in 2011 reminds us that the operator dependant Doppler testing when done by ONE person with lots of experience returns positive findings of CCSVI in 91.5% of PwMS.
An independent study at the University of Milan, utilizing Zamboni doppler protocol--
published in ACTA Phlebology
http://www.minervamedica.it/en/journals ... 11N02A0109