11–20 of 25 posts
Assuming that the treatment is proved to be successful -- and despite promising early results, that's still a ways off -- what happens to the various "find a cure for MS" organizations? Would they go away quietly? Is there a precedent for such an event?
The U.S. society goes further, discouraging patients from getting tested or seeking surgical treatment. Rather, it continues to promote drug treatments used to alleviate symptoms... Statements like this make me wonder how much influence the drug industry had in this decision. Clearly it's not in their best interest for MS sufferers to get surgery and be done with it. I'm sure they rather MS sufferers take a Rx for th…
Although these are big falls 65 patients is not a large group. I'm not surprised the MS Society is cautious at this stage.
More radical still, the experimental surgery he performed on his wife offers hope that MS, which afflicts 2.5 million people worldwide, can be cured and even largely prevented. Isn't that considered a breach of medical ethics, and generally just a bad idea?
More radical still, the experimental surgery he performed on his wife offers hope that MS, which afflicts 2.5 million people worldwide, can be cured and even largely prevented. Isn't that considered a breach of medical ethics, and generally just a bad idea?
The U.S. society goes further, discouraging patients from getting tested or seeking surgical treatment. Rather, it continues to promote drug treatments used to alleviate symptoms... Statements like this make me wonder how much influence the drug industry had in this decision. Clearly it's not in their best interest for MS sufferers to get surgery and be done with it. I'm sure they rather MS sufferers take a Rx for th…
"The initial studies done in Italy were small but the outcomes were dramatic. In a group of 65 patients with relapsing-remitting MS (the most common form) who underwent surgery, the number of active lesions in the brain fell sharply, to 12 per cent from 50 per cent; in the two years after surgery, 73 per cent of patients had no symptoms." Although these are big falls 65 patients is not a large group. I'm not surprise…
The U.S. society goes further, discouraging patients from getting tested or seeking surgical treatment. Rather, it continues to promote drug treatments used to alleviate symptoms... Statements like this make me wonder how much influence the drug industry had in this decision. Clearly it's not in their best interest for MS sufferers to get surgery and be done with it. I'm sure they rather MS sufferers take a Rx for th…
"The initial studies done in Italy were small but the outcomes were dramatic. In a group of 65 patients with relapsing-remitting MS (the most common form) who underwent surgery, the number of active lesions in the brain fell sharply, to 12 per cent from 50 per cent; in the two years after surgery, 73 per cent of patients had no symptoms." Although these are big falls 65 patients is not a large group. I'm not surprise…
Similarly, if the average number of active lesions stayed at 50% for a control group, and fell to 12% for the test group, that's statistically significant.
Even if the group is small if the observed deviation is high then the observation is significant! Sample size is only half the story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The initial studies done in Italy were small but the outcomes were dramatic. In a group of 65 patients with relapsing-remitting MS (the most common form) who underwent surgery, the number of active lesions in the brain fell sharply, to 12 per cent from 50 per cent; in the two years after surgery, 73 per cent of patients had no symptoms." Although these are big falls 65 patients is not a large group. I'm not surprise…
If 95% of the patients would have MS symptoms continue for two years at least, then having only 27% of the patients show symptoms 2 year on, is insanely significant statistically. Similarly, if the average number of active lesions stayed at 50% for a control group, and fell to 12% for the test group, that's statistically significant. Even if the group is small if the observed deviation is high then the observation is…
The other point to note is that this article has been written for mass consumption and as such highlights the good but perhaps also misses the problems. I've had a quick look for a peer-reviewed article. I've found this (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2647682/?tool=pu...) which I think talks about the initial part of this study but it doesn't include the 2 year follow up.
I really do hope this is as positive as it initially sounds but there is still some way to go yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The initial studies done in Italy were small but the outcomes were dramatic. In a group of 65 patients with relapsing-remitting MS (the most common form) who underwent surgery, the number of active lesions in the brain fell sharply, to 12 per cent from 50 per cent; in the two years after surgery, 73 per cent of patients had no symptoms." Although these are big falls 65 patients is not a large group. I'm not surprise…
I can understand being cautious about surgery, but what would be the problem with getting tested? Surely donating data to the research would be a good thing?
At the time that article was posted the only peer reviewed article showed a correlation between MS and reduced blood flow but no details on treatment. To my reading it seems fairly balanced in that context.
To some extent I'm playing devils advocate but here goes . . .
Why shouldn't people be tested? Tested by who? Are there sufficient qualified people? How would it be paid for? Would it take resources away from other treatments which we know, even if not very well, do work? What would be the value? How long would people be waiting before they could be treated? Would people be a little more lax in taking other treatments during this time? If the treatment proved not to work as advertised what would be the effect on those who had hoped it would?
Donating data is a good thing? What would be the selection criteria? Those rich enough to pay for the scan themselves? Are they representative? What would be the administrative overhead? Just as adding a new developer to a project behind schedule can slow things down further would an avalanche of volunteered data slow down the overall process? To what standards would this data be collected?
The U.S. society goes further, discouraging patients from getting tested or seeking surgical treatment. Rather, it continues to promote drug treatments used to alleviate symptoms... Statements like this make me wonder how much influence the drug industry had in this decision. Clearly it's not in their best interest for MS sufferers to get surgery and be done with it. I'm sure they rather MS sufferers take a Rx for th…
MS being multiple sclerosis. I went through thinking it was something to do with Microsoft.. so if you're reading here first, don't make that mistake :-)