I disagree with some of what Colins says but I think his arguements are well worth reading.
http://medicalmyths.wordpress.com/2009/ ... boni-myth/
Colin
I hope you are kidding??? is it a full moon or something?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/73416633@N ... 355668679/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/73416633@N ... 258206796/
My guess is oedipus complex with a chubby mother... lol
Don't waste your time reading this crap !!!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/73416633@N ... 355668679/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/73416633@N ... 258206796/
My guess is oedipus complex with a chubby mother... lol
Don't waste your time reading this crap !!!
not again?
Colin doesn't present facts, just slander and ad hominen (personal) attacks against individuals (Dr. Zamboni) and institutions (BNAC). My recommendation is that no one waste their time reading his nonsense.
-
ozarkcanoer
- Family Elder
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:00 pm
- Location: St. Louis, Missouri
- Contact:
scorpion,
I will have to respectfully disagree with Colin. This is a man who attacks the whole CCSVI hypothesis based on very little opposing evidence. He could very easily have written "The Spherical Earth Myth" or "The E=MC**2 Myth" or "The Earth is 4.5 Billion Years Old Myth".
CCSVI may be a dead end in the search for a treatment for MS (notice I didn't say cure. Dr Zamboni has NEVER said cure!). But what he and Dr Zivadinov and Dr Haacke and everyone else who is involved are doing is science. Why Colin Rose has chosen to attack DR Zamboni is a complete mystery to me.
Actually I wish Mr Rose would present "The Copaxone Myth" !!! They don't really know how/if it works, but it costs me $50,00 a year. At least CCSVI is a hypothesis that is scientifically provable or disprovable. But Colin doesn't give it a chance.
ozarkcanoer
I will have to respectfully disagree with Colin. This is a man who attacks the whole CCSVI hypothesis based on very little opposing evidence. He could very easily have written "The Spherical Earth Myth" or "The E=MC**2 Myth" or "The Earth is 4.5 Billion Years Old Myth".
CCSVI may be a dead end in the search for a treatment for MS (notice I didn't say cure. Dr Zamboni has NEVER said cure!). But what he and Dr Zivadinov and Dr Haacke and everyone else who is involved are doing is science. Why Colin Rose has chosen to attack DR Zamboni is a complete mystery to me.
Actually I wish Mr Rose would present "The Copaxone Myth" !!! They don't really know how/if it works, but it costs me $50,00 a year. At least CCSVI is a hypothesis that is scientifically provable or disprovable. But Colin doesn't give it a chance.
ozarkcanoer
ccsvi a dead end for treatment of ms? this doesn't make sense to me. this condition was classified as congenital based on the principle that affected veins are sturcturally different, at the molecular level. if the vein cannot be opened with endovascular therapy (ballooning or stent), say the entire vein is too narrow or malformed, there is still a possibility that depending on it's location, it can be replaced. my grandfather's carotid artery was replaced with a portion of arterial vessel from his leg. the jugular is large enough that a similar procedure could be proposed. other locations or missing veins are another story entirely, but i still would not say those folks are at a dead end as perhaps they will be able to have a procedure similar to a ventriculo-peritoneal shunt for cerebrospinal fluid management. dead end? knowing the actual factual cause is only the beginning!
I can't help commenting on that and his irresponsibility! This is my left IJV:Bilateral congenital complete occlusion of the internal jugular veins as purported to exist by Drs Zamboni and Simka is incompatible with life.
Can you notice that my left clavicle bone has strangled it? Can you see the malformation?
While I am not a doctor, I can assure you that at the time I am writing these lines, I am alive, despite the "incompatibility". I can prove I was alive during angioplasty: See the heart beating. Too sad, I can't prove I were not brain dead.
If he really feels the need to impress people with his super knowledge, he could do something really useful, instead. But a visit to a psychiatrist would be a good and easy start, though.
The 100% life incompatible,
sou(r)[/url]
He loves the attention. We've just given him some more.
RRMS Dx'd 2007, first episode 2004. Bilateral stent placement, 3 on left, 1 stent on right, at Stanford August 2009. Watch my operation video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwc6QlLVtko, Virtually symptom free since, no relap
I think it was an excellent article. I want to hear and read many more
scientists ideas and thoughts about the CCSVI theory. Really livens up
the debate.
What are we afraid of? - some part of the theory being challenged?
Although probably many disagree with Dr Roses' critiques all science is open to this process and it's very healthy and very needed. txs.
scientists ideas and thoughts about the CCSVI theory. Really livens up
the debate.
What are we afraid of? - some part of the theory being challenged?
Although probably many disagree with Dr Roses' critiques all science is open to this process and it's very healthy and very needed. txs.
-
ozarkcanoer
- Family Elder
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:00 pm
- Location: St. Louis, Missouri
- Contact:
I already have an opposing viewpoint : my own neurologist. But my neurologist hasn't made a personal attack on Dr Zamboni or anyone else for that matter. It will just take time to "prove" or "disprove" CCSVI, I agree with that. That is a more intelligent opposition. Colin is just arrogant and self-serving.
ozarkcanoer
ozarkcanoer
-
fiddler
- Family Elder
- Posts: 398
- Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:00 pm
- Location: Fredericton, Canada
- Contact:
Scientific Debate
Scientific debate concerning CCSVI is good. But the article is not scientific: its arguments are primarily based on innuendo, half-truths and conjectures, many of which have already been proven to be false, such as the "fact" that if CCSVI were true then "the heads of MS patients would look like the legs of patients with varicose veins, swollen, and blue with protruding tongue and eyes".
It would be much more fruitful to read articles from critics and skeptics who have valid arguments and can back them up with evidence. Readers of this article will a) either believe what he says because they haven't informed themselves or b) realize what a load of crap this is and get turned off searching for truly scientific arguments against CCSVI. Either of these results would be unfortunate.
...Ted
It would be much more fruitful to read articles from critics and skeptics who have valid arguments and can back them up with evidence. Readers of this article will a) either believe what he says because they haven't informed themselves or b) realize what a load of crap this is and get turned off searching for truly scientific arguments against CCSVI. Either of these results would be unfortunate.
...Ted
Dx SPMS in 2004. Liberated 29/04/2010.
My blog: www.my-darn-ms.blogspot.com
My blog: www.my-darn-ms.blogspot.com
Re: Scientific Debate
Deleted
Last edited by Lyon on Mon Feb 08, 2010 3:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Scientific debate concerning CCSVI is good. But the article is not scientific". -Fiddler
Fiddler I feel the same way about Zamboni's article as you do about Colin's material. The good news is that it seems that Zamboni's hypothesis is being tested around the world so hopefully in the next couple of years we should know what CCSVI means in the treatment of MS. Thanks for saying that Mangio. A good debate is healthy but unfortunately this forum is about conspiarcy theories, petitions for this and that, and ways to make the people who have questions and doubts look like "skeptics". I would love to have an open debate in this forum some time. Maybe when the "leaders" of this movement are busy appearing on TV and the radio we can all have a good rational conversation??
Fiddler I feel the same way about Zamboni's article as you do about Colin's material. The good news is that it seems that Zamboni's hypothesis is being tested around the world so hopefully in the next couple of years we should know what CCSVI means in the treatment of MS. Thanks for saying that Mangio. A good debate is healthy but unfortunately this forum is about conspiarcy theories, petitions for this and that, and ways to make the people who have questions and doubts look like "skeptics". I would love to have an open debate in this forum some time. Maybe when the "leaders" of this movement are busy appearing on TV and the radio we can all have a good rational conversation??