For what it's worth when I meet with Dr. Rohr in Germany in 2005 he told me that they were stopping the low dose ketamine clinical trials because they did not have successful results with the 10 day low dose trail. He then recommended IV Lidocaine of which I have had good results. Attached is a copy of that abstract published in the American Society of Anesthesiologist Annual Meeting Abstracts.
I know little about about the the politics of these academic circles, research networks, funding and the publishing of papers but I don't think anything is intentionally going unsaid. I have been told that there is always lots at stake including egos when it comes to the academic research regardless of the country researchers and doctors are from. If they are not connected than they are simply not connected academically or financially.
I do however think that most of the low dose ketamine treatments being offered around the USA are more geared towards the revenue generating business models.
Back to the OP about Michael Bernateck et al, they concluded the following:
Quote:
|
In conclusion, IVRB infliximab administration was chosen for the present patient due to the following aspects: 1) No success with standard therapies, 2) CRPS 1 seems to be a local inflammatory process in the affected extremity, 3) reduced side effects, and 4) lower costs compared with systemic IV administration. Randomized, controlled, clinical trials seem promising and are urgently needed.
|
Perhaps the author(s) have something against the "ketamine 3" as you call them. Perhaps the author (s) are trying to drum up funding for there own research and clinical trial, who knows? Could more be done to investigate this drug inflliximab for CRPS? Perhaps, but with everyone jumping on the ketamine money wagon I doubt that will be done.
MsL