Doppler training

[Rokkit]

I'll readily admit that I'm not capable and only Dr Zamboni can label his motives.

Exactly. That's what doubt means. If there weren't doubt, there would be no need for the benefit of the doubt.

[Lyon]

.

[1eye]

How is it that many of you conspiracy buffs do not even think this is suspisious? [sic]

Maybe because we're not really conspiracy buffs. With very few but notable exceptions, I have not seen anyone in this forum, or for that matter in the rest of the world, take Paulo Zamboni at anything other than his word. It is not a liar you are dealing with here.

I mean first Zamboni says he discovers 100% a correlation between CCSVI and MS in his intial [sic] subjects which has not even been close to being reproduced by other researchers. It sounds like not even the docotrs [sic] he works closely with can find this high of a connection [sic] between CCSVI and MS.

There you go casting aspersions again. I would have thought a good skeptic would know their way around an ad hominem argument. And I wish someone would give me a break and cite reference for their numbers. 100 % again. Where exactly?

Than we have the fact that a lot of cofusion [a good neologism] among patients and researchers was caused by Zamboni not being upfront about his "secret method" he used to discover CCSVI in his patients.

Hard to argue against these bogey-men. You trying to expose conspiracy theorists or train them?

Now suddenly he has developed the "MyLabVinco" which I guess is somehow callibrated [sic] to find CCSVI that no other current ultrasound can seem to detect accurately.

Doppler ultrasound, btw. Not hard to find. Maybe hard for some untrained people to use, to detect CCSVI. I'll bet you $1M I can detect it better for example than someone who insists on using the Valsalva maneuver. Even Zamboni's publications nixed that one. (So, ok, first you learn to read.) I can do this with most Doppler Ultrasound machines, and the correct probe. But, not being trained, as an MD, or radiologist, my bet would have to be strictly that.

On top up of that he is offering training, for 4.000,000, euros [sic] that will enable the lucky few to be able to read his ultra CCSVI identifier machine and make a diagnosis of CCSVI. It would be nice if Zamboni would explain the technology he uses in the mylabvino [sic] [hic] that makes it more sensitive to finding and identifying CCSVI than the other thousands of dopplers [sic] around the world. The more I read about this guy the more I smell a rat.

Some things, you just have to endure, because the pleasant smell only comes *after* you wash. If it gets really bad perhaps you *should* stop reading.

Initially he was portrayed a modern day hero but if he is such a hero wouldn't he want to help as many people as possible by his sharing his EXACT protocol for identifying CCSVI.

Don't know of anyone having this problem with their own ignorance. Maybe you do. I would not want my car fixed by someone who had only read the manual. Manuals are good but not even close to the only sources a surgeon should use.

Sorry guys. [sic] Any bit of hope I had about Zamboni and his original study being legit has completly [sic] gone down the tubes. As I have had said before in science ,over time, theories should become easier and easier to prove and it seems like Zamboni's just continues to get more elusive.

Not really. Unless you have an up-to-date 'None-So-Blind' certificate, available from your local 'MS' Society, free of charge.

I believe that further studies into CCSVI are warranted but ceratinly [sic] the proof is FAR from in the pudding. MyLabVinco. As Charlie Brown would say "GOOD GRIEF"!!!

For conspiracies, how about the one where gold standard procedures are being prevented from happening because a few people trained to do very different things can't (or won't) get a screening test right?

He also said "There's no heavier burden than a great potential." I prefer Snoopy, myself.

[Rokkit]

So the entirety of your point is not necessarily that we should believe Zamboni but that we shouldn't suspect his motives? That's kind of where I've already always been.

No, my point is there are a few here who don't give him the benefit of the doubt on anything. This thread is the latest example. To suggest he's just trying to make a buck from his training and equipment is ridiculous. To suggest that his criteria for diagnosing CCSVI is intentionally vague because it's really just made up anyway is also ridiculous. There are hundreds of catheter venograms validating Zamboni. Maybe at some point a robust study will once and for all prove all the venograms were crap and the whole thing will be a bust. Zamboni may indeed be wrong about everything. He may have made honest mistakes. But to characterize him as a quack or a charlatan is flatly ridiculous. There is enough evidence that we shouldn't need to question Zamboni's motives when he tries to provide what he thinks is the needed training and equipment. That was the entirety of my point. To Cheer's "Mama mia" I would add "Sheesh."

[JCB]

This group needs a refresher course in economics. If Demand is high and Supply is low there is an opportunity to make money. If demand is high and you control the Supply you've got it made. Have any of you taken any post grad work? If you did how many were taught by professors that had written or co-authored text books. Guess what the required reading was? Their book. I knew this when I signed up for courses. We live in a capitalistic society. If we didn't there would be no DMD's, there would be no drug companies, there would be no research.

I want research, so I am okay with people making money if that is what it takes. I am not okay with my MS as "status quo", I am spending money to see if CCSVI is part of the answer for me. At this point, there is more unknown than known about the vascular association with MS. I know that people will get rich when they can give you a pill that makes your MS go away. I say, let's make them rich. We pay professional sports people $5 million a year so we can watch them perform. We don't want to compensate doctors who may get rich by helping us find a cure?

I am not making any judgements on Dr. Zamboni at all. I am just stating the facts as I see them. If CCSVI does not pan out then demand will drop, but let's not abandon all hope because we are skeptical about someones intentions.

[Rokkit]

And I wish someone would give me a break and cite reference for their numbers. 100 % again. Where exactly?

1eye, in Zamboni's original study he did say he found CCSVI in 100% of the 65 pwMS and 0% of the 235 controls. Peace, bro.

[concerned]

We pay professional sports people $5 million a year so we can watch them perform.

I just gotta say, I'm totally against giving any professional sports people ANY money at all. They're in good shape, I say make them go work on a farm or something.

[JCB]

Concerned,

I'm with you.

[CureIous]

Sounds like a scam to me.

In that light, with others charging $20,000 for Arizona oceanfront property, my selling it for $5,000 is not only legitimate but an exceptional value?


*edit=

In that light, with others are charging $20,000

deleted the word "are"[/quote]

Come come now Lyon, my illustration was to simply point out that training replicates and pays for itself many times over, and in the bigger scheme of things medical, is quite the value. You'd pay more to get entry level training at these schools that advertise on TV than for this, and this will pay out in immediate and long term benefits. Once again, 4k, in a heartbeat.

My gf's brother paid 7k for computer learning center in LA to become an entry level programmer. After spending all that time and money, he soon found out that not only was the field swamped, and many jobs going overseas, but those promised entry level jobs were few and far between.

Comparison? There is none, though I appreciate the AZ oceanfront overreach...

[1eye]

...my selling it for $5,000 is not only legitimate but an exceptional value?

John Hartford sez people are selling these lots because 'the Fault Line runs right through here.' One just has to have faith in the seismology. Ocean frontage is going to be plentiful. Get yours now.

[Cece]

And I wish someone would give me a break and cite reference for their numbers. 100 % again. Where exactly?

1eye, in Zamboni's original study he did say he found CCSVI in 100% of the 65 pwMS and 0% of the 235 controls. Peace, bro.

This was in a blinded study, too. So unless the blinding was goofed, he was seeing something in those MS patients and not in the controls.

[1eye]

And I wish someone would give me a break and cite reference for their numbers. 100 % again. Where exactly?

1eye, in Zamboni's original study he did say he found CCSVI in 100% of the 65 pwMS and 0% of the 235 controls. Peace, bro.

I must be reading the wrong study. Can you be more specific?

reading http://jnnp.bmj.com/content/80/4/392.full.pdf Page, paragraph?

peace on you. I'm willing to be corrected.

[Lyon]

.

[L]

I'm paying for two kids in college at the moment, but ven in that light it remains to be proven that what Zamboni has to teach (regarding CCSVI) is worth learning, which takes us back to where we started.

To be honest Lyon, you are the only one going back to the start because Zamboni's, Al Omari's and Simka's papers, along with all the anecdotal evidence are quite enough for us. You must admit, it is starting to get quite compelling. But until results of more blinded studies are out, why not just leave us to it? What does all the repetition serve?

[Lyon]

.