Does your Neurologist know about CCSVI?
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 7:35 am
I am frustrated. And I must admit, that part of my frustration may be because of the type of person I am. I have been an RN for almost 40 years. Trained the "old school" way in a Diploma RN program and then years later went to a University. I seem to be the type of person that has a thirst for medicine.... the hows and whys. Frequently over the years I have been known to read medical texts "for fun". Call me odd but its just the way I am.
I am frustrated at the Neurology community. I am baffled at the lack of curiousity that they have. as individuals and as a group, about CCSVI.
I know they are busy physicians and cannot possibly be up on every "snake oil" cure that promises pwMS relief of symptoms or even "cure". But hey this CCSVI thing has been around for a while now.
They do seem to have enough time to give lectures at dinners sponsored by drug companies and to accept "honorariums" from MS Charity organizations. Certainly with the complexity of the drugs available they must spend a good deal of time educating themselves on these drugs.
Am I remiss in thinking that they should be curious enough to actually read the CCSVI 'white papers" ? Am I wrong to expect that they should know more about CCSVI than the biased articles that appear in the Neuro Magazines?
So far I have told many of the nurses and pharmacists and doctors that I interface with in my day to day life (both work and personal). Most of these people, no, let me correct that, all of the healthcare professionals that I tell about CCSVI seem very interested. They all ask me for a website or ask how they can find out more about it. This leads me to wonder just why the group of physicians that are most effected( the Neurologists) simply appear to be "dis-interested"?
Both of the neuros I have been to with my daughter were obviously misinformed and seemed to have very little of the facts correct. Quite frankly it made me annoyed. I hope they couldn't tell, but I was.
When will these Neurologists read the studies? When will they take more than a fleeting interest? Don't they have an obligation to? Will it happen after the results are known from these double-blind studies?And why do you think so many are reluctant to? I always thought the best and brightest medical students became Neurologists and Neuro surgeons........you would think they would have a normal dose of curiousity when something so big has the possibility of impacting their specialty so much?
I guess I just wonder what you all think are the reasons? And perhaps any neurologists that may stop in to TIMS and read this could tell me why there isn't more interest?
I am not expecting the Neuros to accept CCSVI as the cause of MS, but there seems to be no question of its connection to MS.
I am frustrated at the Neurology community. I am baffled at the lack of curiousity that they have. as individuals and as a group, about CCSVI.
I know they are busy physicians and cannot possibly be up on every "snake oil" cure that promises pwMS relief of symptoms or even "cure". But hey this CCSVI thing has been around for a while now.
They do seem to have enough time to give lectures at dinners sponsored by drug companies and to accept "honorariums" from MS Charity organizations. Certainly with the complexity of the drugs available they must spend a good deal of time educating themselves on these drugs.
Am I remiss in thinking that they should be curious enough to actually read the CCSVI 'white papers" ? Am I wrong to expect that they should know more about CCSVI than the biased articles that appear in the Neuro Magazines?
So far I have told many of the nurses and pharmacists and doctors that I interface with in my day to day life (both work and personal). Most of these people, no, let me correct that, all of the healthcare professionals that I tell about CCSVI seem very interested. They all ask me for a website or ask how they can find out more about it. This leads me to wonder just why the group of physicians that are most effected( the Neurologists) simply appear to be "dis-interested"?
Both of the neuros I have been to with my daughter were obviously misinformed and seemed to have very little of the facts correct. Quite frankly it made me annoyed. I hope they couldn't tell, but I was.
When will these Neurologists read the studies? When will they take more than a fleeting interest? Don't they have an obligation to? Will it happen after the results are known from these double-blind studies?And why do you think so many are reluctant to? I always thought the best and brightest medical students became Neurologists and Neuro surgeons........you would think they would have a normal dose of curiousity when something so big has the possibility of impacting their specialty so much?
I guess I just wonder what you all think are the reasons? And perhaps any neurologists that may stop in to TIMS and read this could tell me why there isn't more interest?
I am not expecting the Neuros to accept CCSVI as the cause of MS, but there seems to be no question of its connection to MS.