Page 2 of 2

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:27 am
by Sotiris
Boreas wrote:[...]
Sotiris, thank you for the links. Unfortunately no post adresses my concern regarding the image depicting the venous system and Dr. Rose's comment that "Veins are normally tortuous with bulbous dilations". I mean, this is a key question indeed.
I agree with you that this is a valid concern. Maybe you will find this discussion interesting.

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:41 am
by Billmeik
rather than dismiss all this I think its important to look at it point by point and respond to the logical arguments. Some of it is just 'skeptical faith' and hysteria but the lagoic needs to be looked at point by point and respoded to.

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:05 am
by Boreas
Sotiris wrote:I agree with you that this is a valid concern. Maybe you will find this discussion interesting.
Thanks, this helps a bit further. My concern is that maybe without proper ultrasound testing, MRI images are not as valid as I thought they would be. Couldn't it be that you do have bulbous jugulars with lots of collateral veins that do look like they were stenosed, but you have to have the proof of a venous reflux to be sure? And does the Haacke protocol alone provide information about flow direction?

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:09 am
by Sotiris
Boreas wrote:[...]And does the Haacke protocol alone provide information about flow direction?
Yes because Haacke's protocol has a part for flow quantification (FQ) to look for reflux.

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:13 am
by cheerleader
Rose is an older cardiologist. He never learned angioplasty, and he doesn't like it. He's a curmudgeon, a grumpy old man, and he believes he knows better than advancing medical science. His "facts" are all wrong. He never read any of the science I sent him. (I addressed every one of his points, he never printed my responses or medical papers...just mocks me.)

He fights those who practice angioplasty on the internet. That's all it is. He blows thru his pie whole on a blog. It's a bully pulpit. Please ignore him. Giving him any attention is unwarranted.

Real doctors don't have time to blog.
cheer

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 12:06 pm
by Jugular
Hey Cheer! If you still have your response handy and can paste it, I'd be interested in reading it.

Jug

Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 3:10 pm
by acol
For my part I have been fully satisfied by the responses of all those people who have contributed so generously to the various threads devoted to this subject. When I first read his website it was glaringly obvious that he had an ax to grind. It was just that I had difficulty initially determining his motives. Thank you Cheer for providing the biggest clue. He is clearly 'past his sell by date' and has not kept abreast of modern procedures. A potentially dangerous man to the uninformed. A dinosaur and best to leave him to his own little protected world where gullible people might be impressed by his outdated CV.