Further to this post, this week's Calgary Herald column from yours truly looks at the hype surrounding the CCSVI theory and "liberation treatment" for MS, and whether all the attention is deserved:
Canada’s premiers will certainly have much to discuss when they meet this week in Winnipeg, so it’s most curious that an unproven medical theory will find its way onto the agenda.
Alongside the discourse on the economy and health care, discussions will take place on the so-called “liberation treatment” for multiple sclerosis (MS).
There is, of course, promising research on treatments for all sorts of diseases. Why should this proposed treatment warrant the immediate and specific attention of Canada’s provincial heads of government?
Such, I suppose, is the Italian doctor’s rock-star status at the moment, that politicians are lining up to associate themselves with the hype surrounding him.
(...)
Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall has called for clinical testing, to be paid for by the Saskatchewan government.
Alberta’s has announced a new working group which will examine whether to follow Saskatchewan’s lead.
Nova Scotia Premier Darrell Dexter, though, has warned his fellow premiers to “make sure that our decisions are made on the basis of the best evidence."
So what does the “best evidence” tell us?
To begin with, Zamboni`s own research has been called into question. An article in The Lancet argued that his study ``falls short of the standards and quality that are acceptable in clinical research."
That would be a moot point, however, if his original findings could be replicated. So far, though, that is not happening.
A University of Buffalo study released in February found CCSVI in 56 percent of MS patients, but also in nearly a quarter of healthy patients. A German study from last month found CCSVI in only 20 per cent of MS patients.
A Dutch study from last month is even more damaging to Zamboni’s theory. Researchers studied 20 MS patients and 20 healthy subjects; blockages were found in ten MS patients and eight healthy subjects. Additionally, the size and direction of blood flow in the brain was normal in all participants.
Furthermore, two separate papers from Germany and Sweden published this week in the Annals of Neurology both report finding no trend of blockages in MS patients.
Other studies are still proposed or already underway. But until and unless they confirm Zamboni`s findings, far more prudence and skepticism is needed.
Unfortunately, much of the media coverage of Zambonis theory omits some or all of the contradictory research. In its place are emotional anecdotes from MS sufferers and those who have undergone the surgery.
It’s all a little too reminiscent of the Andrew Wakefield debacle. Wakefield, of course, is the now-discredited British researcher who claimed that the MMR vaccine was linked to autism.
Like MS, autism represents a frustrating medical mystery we all yearn to see unlocked.
Like Zamboni, Wakefield`s findings threatened to turn conventional medical wisdom on its head. Like Zamboni, Wakefield`s defenders presented the conspiracy theory of their hero struggling against an arrogant and intransigent medical establishment backed by a greedy and unscrupulous pharmaceutical industry.
Much like today, the radical and controversial research made for sexier headlines than the boring research which merely confirmed the status quo.
This may turn out to be a grossly unfair comparison. My fear, though, is that it won`t.
As of now, the sort of attention Zamboni has received is enormously out proportion with the status of his theory. And until much more research is done, this would not seem to be the sort of thing that should be the purview of Canada’s premiers.
No comments:
Post a Comment