Page 2 of 2

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:07 am
by cheerleader
sorry, guys. I've been getting letters/e-mails in Italian from folks, and haven't had time to translate and figure out what's been going on over there. I'll try to look into it today, do some translating and figure out how we can help them.

My Italian is food and opera...not really helpful in this situation, but we'll figure it out....
cheer

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:21 am
by Boreas
tzootsi wrote:Here's the same woman speaking in English:

Yeah thanks, pretty Itlalian though even if she speaks English, isn't it? :P

At 6:45 she starts adressing the point and that doesn't sound very dramatic. Nice talk, anyway :D

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:31 am
by ikulo
Boreas wrote:
tzootsi wrote: doesn't sound very dramatic.
hah, sounds like its much ado about nothing.

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:43 am
by Loobie
There are too many people out here with MS who know about this. You can't hide the truth. If it turns out to be the truth it will come out. Informed patients is all we've ever been. Joan took this to Stanford and started a wildfire. If everyone did that, it will eventually come out. Every time someone takes a swipe at CCSVI we just need to calm down and let it play out. Just because he couldn't publish when he wants to doesn't mean that Wayne State and SUNY and others aren't still working on this.

Did we all expect the community at large to just take this at face value and not take any shots? Not me anyway. This has a long way to go as our Doc, GiCi whose had the procedure, often reminds us.

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:01 am
by mrhodes40
did you see this thread?

http://www.thisisms.com/ftopict-9021.html

Someone called Elesevier and asked, they said it was coming out this week.

It is easy to get concerned about blocked research, but maybe someone jumped to a conclusion?

I mean to buy this paper--I'd like to think that to do so rewards the publisher for doing new potentially controversial work. Think so?

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:06 am
by TFau
I think it's good to support the publisher, but I don't see how they would publish it if they thought the science wasn't sound. I don't mean "sound" as in "proof", but as in a sound scientifically-designed preliminary study. If they felt it was contraversial but wanted to publish it anyway, they'd probably have a disclaimer.

Just my two cents..

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:33 am
by Loobie
Plus,

I hear that all over the internet people are going to start charging more and more. Maybe not true, but I've read articles that allude to that.

Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:58 am
by mrhodes40
wrong thread :oops: