CCSVI and CCVBP

[Robnl]

Hi doc,

I was wondering; Dr. Harshfield mentioned that he saw no flow in my straight sinus. I looked up some info about the sinuses…….the straight sinus is a very important one, right??

I tried to contact Dr. Harshfield and dr.Rosa but no luck.

Can/should I do something about this? Has it consequences?

Regards,

Robert
Ps. Are you coming to Europe?

[uprightdoc]

Hello Robert,

The straight sinus drains the core of the brain and is very important. It is difficult to believe that you have no flow in the straight sinus. Although there are alternative drainage outlets for the core of the brain they lack the capacity of the straight sinus system and the brain would swell from edema due to poor drainage. If you had no flow you would have symptoms similar to a dural sinus/cerebral vein thrombosis. You don't have any signs or symptoms to show there is a problem so you don't need to do something about it. You more than likely have sluggish flow in the staight sinus due to faulty craniospinal hydrodynamics. What's more important than the straight sinus in your case is the spondylosis and stenosis in the lower cervical that may be causing a myelopathy. Did George contact Dr. Cox regarding your case and cervical MRIs?

[Robnl]

Hi doc,

Thx,yes...george has mail contact with his daughter, but no news yet....

[uprightdoc]

Hello Robert,

It is your previous cervical MRI that shows the spondylosis and stenosis that may be causing "cervical spondylotic myelopathy." I don't see the spondylosis and stenosis on the upright MRI of the craniocervical junction probably because the region of interest and focus of the MRI is different.

[NZer1]

Is there a pulse wave encephalopathy component to multiple sclerosis?
Juurlink BH1.
Abstract
The dominant hypothesis in multiple sclerosis is that it is an autoimmune disease; however, there is considerable evidence that the immune attack on myelin may be secondary to a cytodegenerative event. Furthermore, the immune modulating therapies longest in clinical use, although modulating the frequency and severity of exacerbation, do not affect long-term progression towards disability. Clearly alternative perspectives on the etiology of multiple sclerosis are warranted. In this paper I outline the commonalities between idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus and multiple sclerosis. These include decreased intracranial compliance as evidenced by increased cerebrospinal fluid volume and velocity of cerebrospinal fluid flow through the cerebral aqueduct; increased ventricular volume; periventricular demyelination lesions; increase in size of Virchow-Robin spaces; presence of Hakim's triad comprised of locomotory disabilities, cognitive problems and bladder control problems. Furthermore, multiple sclerosis is associated with decreased arterial compliance. These are all suggestive that there is a pulse wave encephalopathy component to multiple sclerosis. There are enough resemblances between normal pressure hydrocephalus and multiple sclerosis to warrant further investigation. Whether decreases in intracranial compliance is a consequence of multiple sclerosis or is a causal factor is unknown. Effective therapies can only be developed when the etiology of the disease is understood.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25760216

[uprightdoc]

Good paper. Juurlink's hypothesis is similar to what I proposed thirty years ago.

[NZer1]

Time is an illusion?

[vesta]

Good paper. Juurlink's hypothesis is similar to what I proposed thirty years ago.

I think upright doc is right to feel frustrated that ideas he has long held are now being presented by others as "new and original". There has long been and still is a strong bias against "functional" thérapies such as Chiropractic. Researchers are still looking for the "happy pill" which will heal all evils. Bravo "doc".

Best regards, Vesta

[uprightdoc]

Thanks Vesta.

Actually, all the others, are far behind and just scratching at the surface. Juurlink's paper only discusses MS. My next book will cover all conditions related to craniospinal hydrodynamics from childhood hydrocephalus to Tarlov cysts and everything in between.

Until next time, TTFN.

[NZer1]

Interesting news from Graham Dobson at the NZ Chiro College;

"I'll be using the Blair upper cervical methodology and it's not primarily about pathology although that's always part of an X-ray examination. Rather it's about identifying the misaligned articulations and the best corrective vectors.

If you haven't been getting regular UC care then it's unsurprising that your neck is continuing down a path of further degenerative change.

I feel I should share this with you...
My own neck was severely compromising my health throughout 2014. So I travelled to California twice for Blair X-rays and adjustments as needed. In 2015 I trained the best intern I could find in the very complex Blair adjustment procedures and was checked every week and adjusted when indicated. As a result I had the best year health wise that I've had in years. I returned to California last December and was re-xrayed and my adjustment modified accordingly. The X-ray improvements were nothing short of surprising even to me. My general health has continued to advance this year despite having to train a new intern as the other one had graduated and moved to Australia.
My last cervical MRI showed improved space for CSF flow.
Regards... "

Dr F I have been in communication with Graham about the Rosa/Damadian results of AO and Upright MRI and it appears that 'time' has ticked around with I my procrastinating about travelling State side for treatments. My concerns have always been that one period of adjustments is not enough and repeated checking and adjustments as required is going to limit my re-hab and recovery potential.

Dr F is there a Blair table model that you recommend?

Is there a re-check time frame that you see as common or is it patient guided by how it goes?

Is there an adjustment technique eg AO when the Blair system is used for alignment corrections that uses xray and vectors for adjustments or is it more for stretching and freeing the muscles and allowing the body to self correct?

I am trying to get my 'head' around the journeys and cost, at one time eg 3-4 years ago when I was travelling to appointments with Graham each weekend I had no great hurdles but now things are different both mobility and finances and sadly that has to stronger influence on getting wellness.

Regards All,
Nigel

[uprightdoc]

... Dr F I have been in communication with Graham about the Rosa/Damadian results of AO and Upright MRI and it appears that 'time' has ticked around with I my procrastinating about travelling State side for treatments. My concerns have always been that one period of adjustments is not enough and repeated checking and adjustments as required is going to limit my re-hab and recovery potential.

Dr F is there a Blair table model that you recommend?

Is there a re-check time frame that you see as common or is it patient guided by how it goes?

Is there an adjustment technique eg AO when the Blair system is used for alignment corrections that uses xray and vectors for adjustments or is it more for stretching and freeing the muscles and allowing the body to self correct?

I am trying to get my 'head' around the journeys and cost, at one time eg 3-4 years ago when I was travelling to appointments with Graham each weekend I had no great hurdles but now things are different both mobility and finances and sadly that has to stronger influence on getting wellness... Nigel

Nigel,

I glad to hear Graham Dobson has moved on from Spinal Network Analysis, which is bogus pseudo science in my opinion.

To answer your questions, one period of adjustments is never enough in people with permanent degenerative changes to the spine. Periodic check-ups and care are always necessary.

There isn't a particular Blair Table for treatment that I recommend. The training and experience of the doctor is more important.

The Blair Techniques is just another method of upper cervical correction based on x-ray analysis of the upper cervical spine. Blair uses a different system of analysis than AO. It also uses a different approach and vectors to counter upper cervical strains (misalignments). There are many methods of specific upper cervical correction such as Atlas Orthogonal, NUCCA, Orthospinology, Blair, Kale Specific, Palmer and others. There is no evidence to suggest that what Dr. Rosa is doing or any other upper specific cervical method is better than the others. Further and much more comprehensive studies are needed. I would also like to see studies that include more thorough pre and post treatment examination protocols, such as standard neurological, orthopedic and muscles tests. Surface EMGs, thermograms, static palpation of the upper cervical spine and leg length analysis are inadequate in light of the pathology, signs and symptoms. It would be better for you to contact NZ college and schedule a date for examination and treatment rather than spend the time and money to travel to the US. The return trip to NZ would most likely offset any potential correction.

[NZer1]

Thanks Dr,
I have faith that the time its taken for me to get the knowledge and find a practitioner has been important and of course the almighty $ has been looming in every decision I make

I have sent a flurry of emails to Graham lately and like you, I agree that there needs to be assessments that stand up to rigor rather than opinions of what is happening. I believe I am a prime candidate for tests of before and after because of my MRI findings to date and the symptom records I have keep.

The thing that stands out like dogs privates in my opinion is that the onset of my progressive symptom group didn't show as lesions or disc bulges on MRI in the first year with 2 MRI's done with two different MRI machines, but the next MRI which was approximately 2 years from onset showed neck and also lumbar bulges, C2 and also brain lesions. That to me is an important observation and the Medical assumptions that imaging tells all immediately is the key insight.

I will talk lots more with Graham if he finds the time. That may be an issue in Modern Medical practices, not enough time spent gathering histories, gathering lab tests and especially not enough time reviewing what others are learning and overlaying that in a personal medical care sense.

Onwards ....................... ;)

Regards All, Nigel

[NZer1]

Hi all,
Dr F I received this feedback today about Blair treatments and it has be wondering many things.

"Blair technique doesn’t advocate post adjustment x-rays so soon. It’s a different concept to the orthogonal techniques which do advocate x-raying after the first adjustment (AO, NUCCA, Grostic etc). Blair is not an orthogonal analysis. It is articular. Both methods are focussed on “lining up the holes in the bones” but have different methods of x-ray assessment and physical assessment. In Blair it’s the physical assessment of a raft of subluxation indicators done each visit that tells us if we are on the right track or not. The need for any subsequent x-rays is established by evidence of less than desirable changes to the indicators.

Checking and keeping an eye on progress is essential and that is why I advocate checking every week to see if the adjustment is holding or not. As adjustments hold for longer then we can space the visits further and further apart. “Holding is healing”. This is indicative of positive changes in the soft tissue elements stabilising and balancing up the muscles and ligaments as I previously mentioned. This will only happen as the “holes in the bones” line up better allowing for the normal range of joint motion and free flow of neural messages and blood flow."

This seems to me to be quite different to Dr Rosa's work and his method of 'proving' things are different due to his method. And that said it is the key factor in Vagus nerve and blood flow alignment issues of the Atlas and the link to de-generative diseases.

I get the impression that there aren't peer reviews and published RCT's that support the Blair treatment explanation?

That also seems to be an issue in all of the Chiropractic work, that excuses are made about cost and that concepts are used to explain away what is occurring. I also guess that using xrays is going to stop repeated testing whereas MRI is ideal?

It also appears that the Blair treatment is about freeing up and mobilizing as a concept rather than alignment correction by adjustment?

Regards,
Nigel

[uprightdoc]

Nigel,

Blair uses a very different approach in the analysis and the adjustment, which takes into consideration assymetry in the condyles of the skull. All of the upper cervical approaches make scientific sense and are equally valid and effective. They all need to be studied. There are no studies to indicate one method is better than another. As far as pre and post checks are concerned, I don't agree with any of their protocols. There are other equally valid non-upper cervical methods that also need to be studied.

The fact there aren't peer review studies is not an excuse. There are no studies because you can't get public funding to do studies, which are expensive. As far as I know, Dr. Rosa got lucky and got private funding, which is like hitting the lottery. Dr. Woodfield writes excellent proposals for studies using the NUCCA method. NUCCA has been trying for decades to get funding for studies but it is nearly impossible. They just published a study on migraines but it is a small study. Migraine studies are very important. Seizures and epilepsy also need to be studies. Much, much more needs to be done.

Restoring function makes far more sense to me than simply correcting misalignment. If a person is weak, I prefer to check for changes in strength. If they have balance or gait issues, I check gait and balance.

It was cool night. It's time to go fire-up my Finnish Heater.

[NZer1]

Hi Dr,
It's 3.00 am and my fire has been used nightly for a week or two now that cooler season has kicked in. My fire is Canadian and I am in a large remodeled home with lots of insulation added to maintain as best possible at our altitude.

Dr as a PwMS, with progression, I think we all have goals regarding function and especially mobility. I also think that there comes a time in this cascade when we click that the damage is the primary issue. If that damage is identified which is a nightmare of processes to search for which triggers are important to give insights to why we are 'different' to a 'normal', then we have Hope.

No amount of re-hab stops progression and any re-hab will be lost in time and passed by greater disability and damage.

So the concepts of Chiropractic are wasted in many senses for PwMS. The search for reasons that the BBB is breaching and the most important thing imo is the strengthening of the endothelial. If diet and lifestyle are not the best they can be then re-hab treatment approach is a futile struggle that is not productive imo. A bucket with a hole mentality! ;)

This why I am focused on the methods such as Dr Rosa's approach. If there is a physical reason that the BBB is breaching as I have seen in Dr Damadian's disc bulge study then there are two things to fathom. One, is there any thing that can be done to stop the reflux effect that sends CSF at force to damage the brain tissue and secondly are there things that can be done to strengthen the endothelial.

Joan Beal's approach makes so much sense, indentify what is occurring in the individual eg is there a blood reflux or a CSF reflux? Finding the action that causes a breach is one step. Understanding the diet and the best diet for a PwMS is something that MUST be a primary daily focus. Any activity is important whether its focused on re-hab or on maintenance BUT if the BBB breach is from activity causing the breach then there is again a consideration to make to mediate that de-generation effect.

So back to Blair or AO etc. If the issue that causes BBB breach is alignment then the best of the best would be my focus. The reality is with Chiropractic when you objectively consider the treatment, the dialogue of explanation is about Faith! No wonder the Chiropractic/DC Industry is so deeply also Religious/Biblical!

If there isn't studies, RCT's and peer papers, then Chiropractic is also going to be rife with ripoff artists and also merchants selling pharma products if they can get licenses or supplements when they can't prescribe the big dollar earners. When you look open mindedly at the Chiropractic Industry it has a large potion of rip offs occurring with add-ons and marketing of fringe income earners for the Chiropractor. So its little wonder that the average DC is thought of as a Faith Healer when there are no scientific research supporting the Faith.

So back to the treatment focus. Management is 'nice' but futile if its a degenerative disease situation. Finding the 'WHY' as Dr Rosa is doing and trialing treatment to correct the issues is logical. Pharma doesn't want to fix the problem and when you open mindedly consider Chiropractic it doesn't fix either, it is looking at income from PwMS. Cold hard facts!

Some pills in Life are hard to swallow! ;)
Nigel