Kirsty Duncan's unpublished letter to the editor

Cece · Post by **Cece** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:48 pm

This was written in response to the series of articles in the Globe.
http://kirstyduncan.liberal.ca/blog/unp ... blindness/

This article details one side of a highly polarised dispute regarding whether or not CCSVI causes multiple sclerosis (MS), and whether or not liberation is a cure for MS–rather than the fundamental question, regarding whether or not MS patients improve following the liberation procedure.

Blaze · Post by **Blaze** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:59 pm

Thanks Cece. And thanks Dr. Duncan for being such a strong advocate. Congratulations on your re-election too Dr. D., despite the otherwise disastrous results in Canada!

1eye · Post by **1eye** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 3:38 pm

Not only did they not publish Dr. Duncan's response, but the Toronto Globe and Mail has been consistently negative about the CCSVI procedure in spite of any information it gets. The willful blindness extends to that and other parts of our public media in Canada. Still today, a Google search using the terms Serono Globe and Mail reports the story of the kickback scandal but only from the Boston Globe. The Toronto paper has suppressed that story completely.

Aleksandra · Post by **Aleksandra** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:30 am

Hi,

I suggest You to watch Kirsty Duncan's presentation at 1st International Medical Conference: Venous Endovascular Forum which was held in March 2011.
Check what she said about CCSVI treatments in Canada:

1eye · Post by **1eye** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:13 am

Contrast this request from a scientist for evidence-based medicine with last year's conclusion by the CIHR committee that there is no such thing as CCSVI because cancer surgeons routinely tie off jugular veins, so obviously, God only intended them as redundant equipment, and they are not going to cause any trouble, even if they are missing. This argument is not meant as scientific evidence. It is meant as ridicule, and it backfires, in a big way. There was never any intention to provide any scientific evidence, outside of evidence of the committee's awareness of the titles and author's names of a few documents. The reason for the current about-face is that there is so much evidence, it is becoming nearly impossible to deny it. Only our seasoned professionals will even try.