New MS treatment can halt progression

[Taurus]

As per BBc
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-36490315
Can somebody guide me pl

[DrGeoff]

First off, this work has been reported numerous times.
It is not "new", but rather a slightly new way of implementing an existing approach.
The big thing about it is that Atkins and Freedman do seem to have the balance about right.

Second, if you look at the Lancet paper, one thing leaps out.
There are so many names on it.
This is usually a giveaway that for many people it is coming up to tenure renewal time.
This means getting your name on as many papers as possible so that you can extend your list of publications.
I wonder how many of the "Authors" have even read the paper.
G

[1eye]

Drs. Atkins and Freedman have been at this research a long time (15 or 20 years). They didn't have the balance right at first. After their patient died, you can bet the treatment changed. There are various protocols all over the world, all called HSCT. These doctors have managed to get press coverage one or more times a year, for virtually the same story. They have something like 8 patients who show the "remarkable" improvement. The woman in the high heels was a favorite this year.

No-one is saying HSCT reverses MS. Dr. Zamboni had more success in his first trial. This is a very heavy-duty treatment. The patients are cherry-picked. Caveat emptor.

[Leonard]

http://www.macleans.ca/society/health/a ... t-so-fast/

I don't trust Freedman.
While he speaks about 5%, others speak about 100%.
He is trying to defer, deter, delay. That would be good for the Billion$ pharma.
But the new treatment paradigm is currently under study world wide and will likely become regular 2nd line treatment soon ...

This thesis talks about cure https://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/di ... TEXT01.pdf

[Leonard]

with ref. to http://www.macleans.ca/society/health/a ... t-so-fast/

This is not a news article, it is an editorial. As such, it is not impartial, nor objective, instead reflecting the bias of unfactual opinion. It heavily references very old, outdated and irrelevant data, especially in terms of treatment safety. From a previous post relevant to this. . . . The big three lies of ignorant neurologists that I see time after time (are they afraid to admit they don't know, or do they have some other ulterior motive? I have no idea). . . . . . . #1 HSCT is experimental (WRONG! HSCT has been performed more than two million times since 1967 and is currently performed more then 50,000 times every year all around the world for cancer. HSCT is NOT experimental; it is a well established and well understood legitimate routine medical procedure performed daily around the world). #2 HSCT has not been shown to be effective for MS and people relapse soon after treatment (WRONG! HSCT is so far the MOST beneficially effective demonstrated treatment to durably halt the underlying disease activity & progression of MS and other hematologically-rooted autoimmune diseases and people have now exceeded well more than a decade of complete disease remission), #3 The absolute biggest lie of them all; HSCT is dangerous and will probably kill you (Super WRONG! Autologous HSCT as utilized for treatment of MS and other autoimmune disorders is safer than regularly driving/riding in an automobile). . .

And that's the most important thing learned from all the years of HSCT clinical study work. . . . HSCT performed earlier in the course of the disease is nearly universally more beneficially effective compared to transplanting later in the disease evolution when there is a greater degree of irreversible disability. Lesson learned: don't wait until it's too late. . .