85% have had "very good results"?

[ozarkcanoer]

Believe half of what you read and none of what you hear, LOL. My mother used to say this to me when I was a little girl. I might believe a published paper in a peer-reviewed journal. I also think negative results are under reported.

ozarkcanoer

[Cece]

The only disappointing thing I noticed that day was that out of all of the patients there, none of them had improved motor function -- only cognitive function and improvements in fatigue (which is GREAT, don't get me wrong!). It did make sense, though, that we can't create myelin immediately, but we can improve the supply of oxygen to our brains immediately. Oh, and Bluesky, Dr. Dake discussed a tinnitus patient who was stented on the contralateral side, and the tinnitus went away on the table. He said that is typical for tinnitus. Wow.

thanks for the report, DrDiana!
With tinnitus, there is neurological tinnitus and there is blood-flow tinnitus (there's a name for it...it's the tinnitus that the doctor can hear too if he listens at the spot). It makes sense that the tinnitus that is a direct result of blood flow would improve as the blood flow was improved! Great news for the patient.

I didn't expect motor function improvements but I've had a bad foot for five years since a relapse with foot drop that I'd recovered incompletely from. (It's not that bad, that others would notice, but I was aware of it. I could still walk as far as ever, but I'd be complaining a lot about that foot and leg by the end of it.) I noticed some early improvements since my procedure but it wasn't until three months post that I now no longer have a bad foot; they're equal. Haven't been able to say this for five years. I'm not stumbling with it, it's not heavy, I'm not having stairs issues at all. It was always mild but it was one of the symptoms that worried me because of what might come in future attacks.

[HappyPoet]

Hi Dr. Diana!

So glad for you that you attended the Hubbard Conference! Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us.

Regarding surveying patients, your comments to Dr. Hubbard were terrific, especially regarding statistical significance. It's hard to believe two years have already zipped by since Jeff Beal had the first CCSVI procedure in the U.S. which helps to prove the point that it's never too soon to start collecting data.

The longer that time goes by without patients having been contacted, the more difficult it will become to collect the data; this could be very problematic with patients from other countries. In a perfect world, all doctors would track all their patients on many variables for many years.

You mentioned not having seen any motor improvements. Did you happen to see any patients with any sensory improvements, especially vision- and pain-related improvements? I immediately noticed bright, BRIGHT colors, and my balance improved 100% within a week; unfortunately, I didn't notice any improvement in my levels of pain.

Thank you again for stopping by to share!

[scorpion]

http://www.thecoaster.ca/Community/2011 ... reatment/1

85% of patients that have received the treatment have had very good results with many even returning to work.

These two patients are both going to a clinic in California. I am not sure where they got this figure from, maybe from their clinic? The journalist printed it as if it is a fact.

Does it sound accurate? Inaccurate?

This is probably a pointless question but does anybody care where they came up with 85%? Just look at the people who have posted on the no improvements section on thisisms and you should have doubts about that number. Recently I was listening to a radio show that talked about how people only listened to news conduits that supported their point of view because people hated the thought of changing how they viewed the world. I guess to a certain point we are all gulity of doing it but hopefully when articles like this are posted people read it with a critical eye.

[Cece]

This is probably a pointless question but does anybody care where they came up with 85%?

When I read that, I wondered if they'd been told that by their clinic, but I think if a clinic were telling people this figure, someone would've chimed in by now.

A poster here shared a story about calling a clinic for info about their handicap accessibility and being told that, it didn't matter, she'd be leaving walking and not need the wheelchair.

If we read only the no improvements thread, we'd think it was 100% negative. The improvements reports thread is about 95% positive (I do come across some where the patient had results and lost them and one where the patient had no results at all.)

Dr. Siskin's 66% positive (moderately or mildly), 33% negative (no results or worsening due to complications) may be the best we have to go on, or we go with Dr. Zamboni's published results.

More research would be nice.

Scorpion, I've never asked, have you considered CCSVI treatment for yourself?

[scorpion]

This is probably a pointless question but does anybody care where they came up with 85%?

When I read that, I wondered if they'd been told that by their clinic, but I think if a clinic were telling people this figure, someone would've chimed in by now.

A poster here shared a story about calling a clinic for info about their handicap accessibility and being told that, it didn't matter, she'd be leaving walking and not need the wheelchair.

If we read only the no improvements thread, we'd think it was 100% negative. The improvements reports thread is about 95% positive (I do come across some where the patient had results and lost them and one where the patient had no results at all.)

Dr. Siskin's 66% positive (moderately or mildly), 33% negative (no results or worsening due to complications) may be the best we have to go on, or we go with Dr. Zamboni's published results.

More research would be nice.

Scorpion, I've never asked, have you considered CCSVI treatment for yourself?[/quote]

No more then I would consider taking grape extract to cure/halt my MS BUT I understand others have a differeent perspective and that is great! Cece I guess my problem came from the beginning when Zamboni announced his initial results. I would NEVER expect anyone performing trials with MS to come up with 100% of anything unless they ask people if this disease sucks.

[Karazhan]

I guess my problem came from the beginning when Zamboni announced his initial results. I would NEVER expect anyone performing trials with MS to come up with 100% of anything unless they ask people if this disease sucks.

My initial skepticism was a little less scientific than Scorpion's, it was the term "Liberation Treatment".

[Cece]

I guess my problem came from the beginning when Zamboni announced his initial results. I would NEVER expect anyone performing trials with MS to come up with 100% of anything unless they ask people if this disease sucks.

My initial skepticism was a little less scientific than Scorpion's, it was the term "Liberation Treatment".

I'd say those are both reasonable objections.
And I agree about the 100% this disease sucks!

[1eye]

I'm scientifically 100% certain I know how certain people who post fairly regularly here are going to opine on any question of Dr. Zamboni or CCSVI or the Liberation treatment. I set my watch by it. Hasn't been wrong yet.