Page 2 of 2

Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2011 9:40 am
by Doodles
The only thing that will get the attention of the MS Society of Canada and the neurologists who run it is a significant reduction in revenue. The executive of the Society, the Board of Directors and the medical advisory committees have to go to be replaced by people who will actually operate in alignment with the mission of the Society and who will actually advocate on behalf of MS sufferers. The biggest obstacle to CCSVI testing and treatment in Canada is the MS Society.

Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2011 11:58 am
by 1eye
A Canadian neurologist recently said the following: "Some of the interventionalists like Dr Sandra McdDonald in Barrie have maintained that the problem is vascular, not neurological, so they should be permitted to proceed with diagnosis and management

Since we are the ones doing all the 'killing', we should at least be the ones deciding how to stop it.

Sd that same Canadian neurologist wrote to his patients " Since death is also a risk, then I ask those individuals to strongly consider advising their family of an advanced directive for an autopsy. We should maximize every learning opportunity"'
I think that the sentence about ‘killing’ is not part of the neurologist quotation, but I do believe that much real harm is being done by the neurologist’s words to his patients. In fact if I were one of them I would greatly fear for his sanity and my own safety. If I were a loved one I would insist that the patient go nowhere near this person again.

Advising people in advance that their loved one will die, is playing God in the worst sense. Speaking as if an autopsy will be required (presumeably if they have the procedure for CCSVI) is deliberately lying, insensitive and brutally abusive in the extreme. The implication, completely false, is that the patient is taking a great risk with their life. "Fear, uncertainty and doubt" (FUD) is one thing, but self-serving, harmful lies are another.

It sounds intended to be provocative, but just comes across as cruel.

This person should not be allowed to have patients of any kind. He obviously has no interest in their welfare.

Whoever this is (and I think I am aware, having had personal dealings with someone with an identical "bedside manner") should apologize, and be sued by all recipients of this letter. I would be filing a class action.

Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2011 11:55 pm
by NZer1
Dr S can you clarify the quote for us please. Its hard to tell who said what. Is there a reference we can go to please?

Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:50 am
by annad
Let me pick on just one of the 'expert' panels. . . Dr. Rubin sat on the original 'expert' panel that advised the Health Minister to not proceed with pan-canadian trials because there wasn't enough evidence. Now, he will sit on yet another panel to create an after-care protocol for a condition and treatment that he obviously didn't support or believe in.
Atheists can't become priests!

This country is working on perfecting stupidity and repeated mistakes.

Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:21 pm
by Doodles
Well said Annad.

Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:05 pm
by thornyrose76
I'm voting Liberal next election. Maybe they'll get it right. :? :cry: :roll: