I just have a few things to add:

1) Let's look at the skeptics and then Jannetta. Who has more to lose at this point? Dr. Jannetta is 77 years old and nearing the end of his career and has made quite a name for himself. He doesn't care about that "name" or reputation but in doing the right thing by making it very public that secondary reversible Parkinsonsism due to vascular compression may be a grossly underdiagnosed condition. The skeptics tend to be in the mid or height of their careers and stand to lose much more at this point.

2) Hotly debated? If anyone has read much on bullying in the workplace will know that bullying takes on a whole new level of mean in the medical profession. It centers on peer reviewed publishing and professional ridicule. Doctors who choose to do what is right and nonconform can even find themselves losing their medical licenses. I highly recommend everyone see what happens to the handful of doctors who go against the grain and acknowledge that Chronic Lyme Disease does exist. Some of these doctors are older and at end of careers but are putting reputation, everything on the line to save lives. See the documentary "Under Our Skin".

I think many more doctors may support Jannetta but cannot do so without severe repercussions.

3) What else do skeptics have to offer us beside defensive expert opinion? How do they NOT know that many more people do not have vascular parkinsonism that is reversible or treatable? Did you have your MRI checked for evidence of vascular compression upon diagnosis? PD is supposed to be a diagnosis by exclusion. I have to date been excluded for nothing. Doesn't that imply a panel of tests are run? Apparently, exclusion means you show two cardinal symptoms based on a 30 minute exam/interview with a doctor. Oh and an MRI to rule out MS. Who decided this was adequate enough to profoundly alter a person's (and their families) life course? The AAN. If they want to so readily mark us down as Idiopathic PD so they can get that billing started and plan their next continuing ed requirement in Aspen at a ski lodge with some one else paying for it, so be it. The skeptics can kick up as much dust as they want, but it does not obscure the fact they cannot for sure say that anyone of us does not have a vascular etiology because they do not screen for it; therefore what they are saying is nothing more than arrogant posturing, or a defense response designed to divert our attention from the truth that some do not respond to Sinemet simply because they do not need it, and that the whole big house of cards begins to sway. In order to keep the cards in place they must routinely tell us what we do not have as well; apparently this too can be done without any actual tests...

4) Even more evidence exists for vascular etiology that is reversible. Case studies show that chronic subdural hematomas cause Parkinsonism and can exacerbate established cases of PD. This can result from slight bump on the head so insignificant the person does not even recall it happening.

A few other rather opinionated thoughts...

Laura