This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community
Welcome to This is MS, the leading forum for Multiple Sclerosis research and support. Join our friendly community of patients, caregivers, and researchers celebrating over 20 years of delivering hope through knowledge.
drsclafani wrote:
I was struck by the rapidity of publication of both articles (German Study and Swedish Study) . Surprising! Both papers were accepted within six weeks. I have never had such rapid decision, editing and publication of any of my more than 120 publications.
This debate is going to be a challenging one . . .
When the good fairy shows up, maybe we can pull together the funds to do a proper response to these 'studies.'
It would be very interesting to actually re-examine some of the patients who were found to not have CCSVI using the appropriate protocol.
I would think that finding that just one or two of these people have CCSVI would be enough to pop the bubble the neurology community is inflating with these 'studies.'
Are you planning to submit your critique of the two studies to the Annals of Neurology? it is beyond surprising to many of us that poorly designed studies would be rushed to publication in a peer reviewed journal.
Are you planning to submit your critique of the two studies to the Annals of Neurology? it is beyond surprising to many of us that poorly designed studies would be rushed to publication in a peer reviewed journal.
Michelle
others have responded quite well but the responses seem to be taking longer to be accepted and published than the objection seems to have taken.
Are you planning to submit your critique of the two studies to the Annals of Neurology? it is beyond surprising to many of us that poorly designed studies would be rushed to publication in a peer reviewed journal.
Michelle
others have responded quite well but the responses seem to be taking longer to be accepted and published than the objection seems to have taken.
Dr, dont you think that sometimes such hurriedly published papers in a way lend credibility to CCSVI? I would be more worried if someone was convincing enough to have tried replicating accepted protocols and yet did not find any issues.
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it
- Max Planck
Any thoughts on kissing balloons? Is it that two balloons are inserted into two different veins and then when they are both inflated, the second balloon helps by...?
"However, the truth in science ultimately emerges, although sometimes it takes a very long time," Arthur Silverstein, Autoimmunity: A History of the Early Struggle for Recognition
I am wondering about the stenosis coming and going thing again. When I have an MS "relapse" it lasts for about a two or more weeks. Is this related to the oxygen deprivation in the brain or what?? Thanks!
Dr. S -
I know you are not an MS doctor, you do the plumbing (so to speak). I am wondering if you have a theoretical answer to this though. If our veins are blocked, they don't block and unblock themselves, right? Why the relapses? It would seem to me that if our veins are continuously blocked then we would be in a continuous relapse, right?
After a false negative catheter Venogram - Dr S said here was CCSVI when i sent him the images, i am now going to Poland for new testing (doppler/MRV) and treatment
But dr S said i had May Thurners too, so what do i ask or request my doctor to do for the procedure?
do i just ask them to enter via the left illiac vein?
how can i persuade them too, as i read its more difficult for them to enter through the left
After a false negative catheter Venogram - Dr S said here was CCSVI when i sent him the images, i am now going to Poland for new testing (doppler/MRV) and treatment
But dr S said i had May Thurners too, so what do i ask or request my doctor to do for the procedure?
do i just ask them to enter via the left illiac vein?
how can i persuade them too, as i read its more difficult for them to enter through the left
AdamT - I was treated 6 days ago by Dr S in Albany. The preferred entry is through the left side. They prepped me on the left side, and while I'm in twilight zone and the entry was made, the doc asked his nurse to prep right side. Afterwards, I get the scoop... Dr S(#2) told me he thought he had seen the worse case of May-Thurner - before he saw me! (yeah, I've always been special He wasn't sure he could get through and that is why they prepped the right side; as it turned out, he didn't have to. And about that M-T....he doesn't recommend doing anything there as my body has efficiently overcome it (wish I had asked for more details...and will).
Are you planning to submit your critique of the two studies to the Annals of Neurology? it is beyond surprising to many of us that poorly designed studies would be rushed to publication in a peer reviewed journal.
Michelle
others have responded quite well but the responses seem to be taking longer to be accepted and published than the objection seems to have taken.
Dr, dont you think that sometimes such hurriedly published papers in a way lend credibility to CCSVI? I would be more worried if someone was convincing enough to have tried replicating accepted protocols and yet did not find any issues.
no, a negative is a negative
the frustrating part of this is that advocates need to publish, but the irb process seems to take so long
He wasn't sure he could get through and that is why they prepped the right side; as it turned out, he didn't have to. And about that M-T....he doesn't recommend doing anything there as my body has efficiently overcome it (wish I had asked for more details...and will).