|
Hi Joan,
Most insurance companies will not pay for HBO to treat RSD; worse, any hospital that uses HBO to treat RSD or almost any other disorder will lost all Medicare and Medicaid funding. This means that it will not pay for any MC or MA patient in that hospital. The reason for this is that the FDA has ruled that ALL diseases must be treated with drugs or surgery. The pharmaceutical industry owns the FDA, and they can't make money off of HBO, so the FDA says that hospitals can only use HBO to treat a very tiny number of diseases. I think it is only 8 or 9. IRI is on that very short list: RSD is not. It gets worse. According to the FDA, advertising anything as a preventative, or treatment that is not a drug, is a violation of the law. If a grocery store were to publish an ad for oranges and say in that ad that oranges can prevent and/or treat scurvy (and, of course, they can), the FDA can come in and confiscate all of the oranges in that store as illegal. They are being sold as medicine, but they are not a drug. I hope you will look up Buckwheat's thread Vascular Issues; It does answer some of the questions you asked. I'm not going to discuss HBO right now because I really feel it needs to be addressed in a thread of its own...Vic |
Quote:
Hello, I think some how our wires are crossed because I didn't use the word somatic in my post:wink: I know the word somatic and it's definition but I was talking only of the psychiatric illness called Somatisation which was mentioned in Allen's post. Somatisations is an illness in which people present with symptoms with no identifiable cause-----There have been many patients with RSD/CRPS whom have been wrongly diagnosed with Somatisation simply because they have some of the symptoms but not the signs of RSD/CRPS that some doctors use as a diagnosis. Hope that clears things up. Cheers Tayla:hug: |
Hi to Joan,
Whilst RSD/CRPS is not one of the illnesses that are nominated for by Medicare here in Australia there are ways around it-----That is why I have had treatment.:wink: The list here is:- Radiation Injury Necrotising soft tissue infections Non- healing diabetic wounds Gas Gangrene Decompression Illness (the bends) Air Embolism Carbon Monoxide poisoning Crush Injuries Traumatic Ischaemias Compromised flaps and grafts Osteomyelitis Thermal Burns Fortunately there are recommendations now that it maybe useful in diseases such as Chronic Pain condition, MS and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and thus pressure is being put on our medicare to widen the criteria for use of HBOT. The chances of being accepted for HBOT are increased if there is proven damage to tissue due to vasoconstriction (ulcers etc). That is how I qualified as I had a measurement done of the oxygen level in my skin which was preventing wound healing, it was low and they said yes!:) As the constriction and dilatation of our blood vessels is controlled by our autonomic nervous system and as this is usually affected with CRPS, it would seem that there maybe many people who could meet the criteria this way. Let's hope that soon our disease will be accepted and we will not have to try and get through the back door:( Take care Tayla:hug: |
This is the first of a series of posts discussing the information found in Allen’s post on page 4. It is a long post and it presents a lot of opportunities to discuss the contrasts between nerve injury and IRI as the cause of RSD. I hope these posts help people sort out facts from fiction about RSD.
The underlying causes of the syndrome have yet to be defined, and no definitive diagnostic test exists even though CRPS was first described in the late 19th century by the neurologist Silas Weir Mitchell. Mitchell referred to the cluster of symptoms he noticed in some of the Civil War soldiers who were under his care as "causalgia."1 The soldiers persistently complained of severe, burning pain long after their wounds had healed.2 They also experienced swelling, redness, and temperature fluctuations at the injured site, typically a limb. no definitive diagnostic test exists. Neurologists are experts at designing tests that diagnose neurological disorders, but they can’t find any way to diagnose any neurological dysfunction in RSD; perhaps because the neurological dysfunctions in this disease are the result, NOT the cause of RSD, The IASP further divides CRPS into CRPS I, in which major nerve damage is not present, and CRPS II, in which major nerve damage is present. [Emphasis added]. The vast majority of RSD patients are diagnosed with CRPS-I, in which no nerve injury is present, yet every RSD “expert” who writes about this disease continues to explain RSD/CRPS-I as the result of a nerve injury they admit isn’t there. If there is no nerve injury in CRPS-I, what causes it? "You diagnose CRPS I only when there is no medical explanation for the symptoms," said Jose Ochoa, MD… In his view, it means that the clinician simply has failed to diagnose the true cause of pain-whether it be nerve injury, arthritis, phlebitis, hysteria, or malingering. Ochoa is a former RSD “expert” who once argued that this disease is caused by damage to sympathetic nerves. He eventually realized that this is not a neurological disorder, but instead of looking for the actual cause, he decided he could make more money by becoming an insurance empire expert and testify that RSD patients are either malingering or mentally ill. He uses his knowledge that this isn’t a neurological disorder to blow RSD “experts” out of the water by asking questions like: “You say this is a neurological disorder, but can you provide any evidence at all that it is?” The RSD “expert” is forced to admit that he/she has absolutely no evidence at all. The RSD patient loses because the RSD “expert” can’t even prove RSD/CRPS-I even exists. The fact that cyanosis isn’t mentioned in any diagnostic criteria of RSD means that the patient can’t even point at her/his purple skin and say “Of course it exists. Look at my arm”; the insurance empire lawyer can simply reply “Cyanosis isn’t mentioned in the RSD literature, so whatever is turning your arm purple can’t be part of RSD”. The patient/victim loses the case. My next post on Allen’s post will talk about diagnostic criteria…Vic |
Vicc, I appreciate that you may just choose to ignore this and I respect your choice if you, do but in your post you said---
The fact that cyanosis isn’t mentioned in any diagnostic criteria of RSD means that the patient can’t even point at her/his purple skin and say “Of course it exists. Look at my arm”; the insurance empire lawyer can simply reply “Cyanosis isn’t mentioned in the RSD literature, so whatever is turning your arm purple can’t be part of RSD”. The patient/victim loses the case. ~~~~~ My question is- Where is cyanosis denied as a possible sign of RSD/CRPS? Who is denying that many people (but not all) with RSD/CRPS have cyanosis? Every description of possible signs and symptoms I can find mentions cyanotic looking skin (which of course we all know does not necessarily mean there is tissue damage) Every one of the multitude of "insurance empire lawyers" I have had dealings with have never bothered to query my case citing that cyanosis isn't mentioned in RSD literature so therefore saying I don't have it!! I would call myself somewhat of a chameleon as all of my RSD area have transient colour changes, cyanotic colouring being just one of them. If I was to believe that the cyanotic colouring was an IRI then that would infer that I have had a period of ischaemia and the tissue has been damaged when the blood flow was returned to it. Vicc, can you please explain why the areas of spread of my RSD that have transient cyanotic appearance have never had an ischaemia caused by a tourniquet or anything else. I have had however, many periods of autonomic nervous system related vasoconstriction that lead to severe cyanosis but because this is transient then I have to believe there is no IRI. I do have severe trophic changes to much of my skin, it is shiny, warm and oedematous in places and atrophied in others-----does this mean that my diagnosis of RSD is incorrect? I have never been met with the sceptisism that you describe, perhaps I am just a lucky one but the "experts" here (the ones I have come in contact with over the years) seem aware that RSD/CRPS is indeed a variable with no two patients necessarily having the same signs and symptoms or aetiology. I have said before that I know there is NO proof of the cause of this disease and without re posting all the previous abstracts and opinions from those doctors and scientists who do spend time researching this disease, the overwhelming opinion is that it is neurologically based----this being different to saying that there is a particular nerve injury in RSD/CRPS TYPE 1. Vicc, I am more than happy to be swayed by an opinion or a hypothesis if I can see how and why it makes sense to me but with the huge variability between RSD patients, I just need a reason to believe that our cyanotic tendancies are anything but a sign of our very "confused" autonomic nervous system but at the same time agreeing that there maybe some people that have RSD that has been caused by an IRI. Sincerely Tayla |
Quote:
Here is the Vascular issues thread link- http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/sh...ascular+issues |
need to repost
|
I am happy to delete this...Vic
|
May I ask that this post be closed it seems to be that some must have the last word. I ask mods please close this down :) enogh is enough and you have the last word.
We all have better things to do there are other post that should get more attention than these. I'm not flamming anyone just asking that if this keeps up I ask the mods just to get rid of these post for good if at all possible. Peace to you all love in your hearts, we all suffer why would we want stress on anyone, stress is the worst thing for CRPS/RSD. |
Yes, it feels it's time to close this thread.
Thanks, KD |
In hindsight, I feel this thread is vaulable to many and I'm opening it back up to continue...without mention of the prior conflict.
I appreciate everyone in this...so much. KD |
Thank you for working with me on this.
KD |
no definitive diagnostic test exists. Neurologists are experts at designing tests that diagnose neurological disorders, but they can’t find any way to diagnose any neurological dysfunction in RSD; perhaps because the neurological dysfunctions in this disease are the result, NOT the cause of RSD,
I have done alot of research on this subject and have come to the same conclusion Sandra |
Hi Sandra,
It's good to know that there are some people who are reading my posts and comparing what I say with information they find from their research. Thank you...Vic |
Hi everyone,
I know I run the risk of being thought as being like a broken record but if I thought that some of my questions had been answered by what I read, I would not continue to ask :( I respectfully put these questions to anyone who can give me an answer. * If RSD/CRPS is NOT neurologically based (as opposed to a specific nerve injury) then why is there world wide, well documented evidence that early intervention with Nerve Blocks and Mirror and Graded Motor Imagery when there is often no other symptom other than pain , is there is a high chance of remission or full recovery? * Isn't it true that an injury or malfunction of our Autonomic nerve supply will lead to one of the possible symptoms of RSD/CRPS--ie-cyanosis due to vasoconstriction, as it is the autonomic nerve supply which controls the dilation and constriction of our vessels and therefore account for any resultant atrophic changes. *If RSD/CRPS can be caused by something as simple as a paper cut where there has been no disruption to the perfusion of the skin, how can this be an IRI? *If the diagnosis of IRI is when there has been damage to the tissue after the blood is returned to it after a time of ischaemia and RSD/CRPS is an IRI, then why do so many people have RSD/CRPS without ever having a period of ischaemia in that limb. This would be particularly relevent in the spread of the disease which usually occurs with NO particular inciting event to the area of spread. I thank anyone who will consider these questions and without reposting the myriad of articles and abstracts that have been recently been posted with regard to the possible causes of RSD/CRPS, I would just like to recommend any article written by the well known leader in treatment of RSD/CRPS- Dr. Wilfred Janig. What he says makes sense to me but of course---that is just me. Cheers to all Tayla:hug: |
Tayla,
Re: Your most recent series of questions. #1. You cite instances in which there is often no other symptom other than pain: A diagnosis requires signs and symptoms other than pain. If someone is diagnosed with RSD based solely on pain, it does not appear to be valid. #2. Please read my first post on the thread Facts, fiction and RSD. It explains how sympathetic vasoconstriction became the only explanation for this disease for 70 years and why research eventually discredited this view. #3. Please read my post #17 on this thread. #4. IRI only begins after the immune response to trauma, and that response always involves ischemia; if RSD is IRI, there was, and is, ischemia. I guess I wasn't specific when I asked for questions or comments, but what I meant were questions about what I wrote on the thread, NOT what I have written elsewhere. I can't accomplish my goal of explaining IRI if I have to spend my time answering questions about what I have written in other posts...Vic |
Vicc, I just wanted to say "Thanks". I have been doing a bit of research since you started this thread. I am fascinated by your approach to this awful disease. There is a dr. named B. Kaada who has many articles about ischemia in the European Heart Journal. I think you might find some of this info helpful. Oddly enough, I came across the name of this Dr. through a printout given to me for my TENS unit. Kaada's name is on it, and basically he/she equates rsd/crps with ischemia. I hope this name helps you in some small way to prove your theory. I would dearly love for you to be correct, so we can all get the treatment we need and deserve. Like you, I have virtually no life off my couch or bed. As my legs are elevated above my heart 24 hours a day, I have little in the way of color changes, unless I am on my feet at the grocery store for a while. As my crpsII spreads to other limbs, I have noticed that the color changes don't ever start in the limb! I get all the cramps, spasms and pain, however. :( I can't say that the pain isn't related to my other conditions (epilepsy & aids), though... I know the aids is the reason for my inability to heal properly, it's probably responsible for the pain not subsiding with the other symptoms. The meds I am supposed to take for aids would also add greatly to my pain levels... they cause peripheral neuropathies, joint pain and muscle problems of every sort. That's why I am NOT on any... the whole dying of aids thing is a lot more merciful than a lifetime of crpsII. Keep up the good work, Vicc! Without people like you working towards a proper diagnosis, this mess will never be cleared up. |
Vicc,
I am sorry that you think that you are wasting your time answering my questions but I actually did not address these questions to you specifically. As I have said previously I would not still be asking questions if I thought you had supplied me with an answer that I thought explained my queries. You brought attention to me saying that 'the only symptom of RSD/CRPS was pain" and I feel I must address your comment. Long gone are the days when doctors rely on a page full of signs and symptoms before RSD/CRPS is diagnosed. Current well informed doctors look for the possibility of RSD/CRPS if pain is a problem far after it's expected time of healing as early diagnosis and intervention is preferred before the list does get longer. Many people have got better from the early intervention with nerve blocks--the Noigroup web site will validate this and also leaves me convinced that if this was not a disease neurologically based that this would just NOT be the case. I still have many questions that remain unanswered from my last two posts. I guess that is how it will stay. Cheers Tayla |
Vicc
I know your intentions are good but I am not sure what the whole point is here. IRI has been in the RSD research and literature for as long a I have been reading and long before that. You only need to put RSD and ischemia into your google search engine and you get about 35,000 hits. You are not reinventing the wheel or bringing anything new to the table. There is no conspiracy to hide this part of the disease process from us.It is well known to most doctors who are knowledgeable in RSD Why I just pulled this randomly from the google search http://www.rsdinfo.com/rsdinfo3.0/art_6.htm. It is part of the picture but an an incomplete pathology - that is why the docs and we in turn do not have ALL the answers. When I was first diagnosed in 2000 there was a nurse named Heather on these boards who sought HBOT for her RSD and got very good results with it. Another patient followed her to the very same clinic and did not see any change in her condition-same clinic same air pressure - and same consistency in treatments - completely different results. I guess there must be something else at play here. There are many if not hundreds of HBOT centres which offer treatment for RSD especially in big cities. The inflammatory response( abridged big time) which is a big part in all diseases can only be helped with this kind of treatment .Maybe if you got out more you would know this is happening.I know this is not your fault but the internet can sometimes give you a false sense of reality if you follow the information highway and take a left turn when it should have been a right .That can mess up the whole theory:) What troubles me is your refusal to answer questions- only someone who is unsure of their knowledge and doesn't have the answers would feel so threatened by something as innocuous as a question Once you put yourself out there that is part of the deal In peace GnP |
GnP
IRI has been in the RSD research and literature for as long a I have been reading and long before that. I write about IRI because I believe it isn't well-understood. My posts get a lot of hits, and I get comments thanking me for them; I suggest this means I am helping some members better understand this disease process. When I was first diagnosed in 2000 there was a nurse named Heather on these boards who sought HBOT for her RSD and got very good results with it. Another patient followed her to the very same clinic and did not see any change in her condition-same clinic same air pressure - and same consistency in treatments - completely different results. I wrote about the reason for different outcomes and outright failures of HBO on Buckwheat's thread Vascular Issues. Perhaps after reading that you will better understand my explanation for outcomes. What troubles me is your refusal to answer questions- only someone who is unsure of their knowledge and doesn't have the answers would feel so threatened by something as innocuous as a question I asked that questions be limited to what I posted on a the thread on which the question is posed. I think that is reasonable as others may have no idea of exactly what I wrote in another thread. I think my request is reasonable...Vic (added later): I tried Google using "iri and rsd" and the first two links I found were NT and this thread. Using "rsd and ischemia", this thread was the 7th link. Thanks, I needed that...Vic (added even later): Using "rsd and cyanosis". this thread was the 1st link. I'm assuming Google automatically lists the most recent entry, so this thread should fade rather quickly. (added even later): Using "rsd and hbot", this thread was # 4 on page 2. This is fun. |
I am not going to be another to fall for your word games so this will be my last post on the matter.I spoke my peace and you chose to address those points that interested you and left the rest .
The last thing I want to do is get into a game of semantics and power with you. I will respond to the issues: re HBOT I mentioned this case precisely because the 2 cases were treated EXACTLY the same way-SAME HBOT centre - same practitioner -same air pressure - same treatment -DIFFERENT outcomes. I believe you mentioned in Roz's thread that the air pressure could be different which would explain why one was not cured and the other was-NOT the case here . I could not find the thread so I am not sure what you said exactly, but it was along those lines - please don't argue minute variables .All variables re:HBOT were constant here EXCEPT for disease presentation in the patient !!!! Ischemia is part of the disease process in most illnesses from heart attack to stroke to diabetes to liver disease .If that were the only component involved in RSD then doctors researching this scourge for 30 years might just have figured it out by now and we would all be cured. Yes, it is a piece in all of this but it is only one fully understood component in a muti-faceted pathology . Peace GnP Added in response and to refute Vicc's response below although I still may make a new post on it: .Heather was indeed "cured".She had a good result .That does not mean that if you use HBOT you will be cured of RSD . I did not mean to imply this .It happened in this particular case . - Again I am not going to argue semantics ,or what you choose to read into things. Again you are blaming the industry,doctors etc.for the pitfalls in your theories - an HBOT centre is run by "professionals " and overseen by doctors and often run by them as well as well. You do realize that HBOT uses different pressures to treat each different disease -HBOT is NOT a one size fits all approach According to you it is just another in a line of conspiracies to keep everyone who stays at home and pontificates sick . Do your research - find a good centre and you will get the outcome that is right for you just like with every other treatment out there-eeeeeshhhhhhh!!!!!!! added later : the fact that you derive so much pleasure from showing up on a google search engine and having to announce it here not once, but 3 times makes me question all your motives - Are you truly that ego driven a person. You are recycling information that is already out there for your own self motivated reasons - Two years ago you were anorexic ,claiming RSD had the best of you and you had lost the will to live.We all tried our best to get you the help you needed including calling social services in your area.What happened to that humble man to turn him so angry and egocentric???It is really sad. Funny how you left that tidbit out of your newly minted biography |
GnP
I believe you mentioned in Roz's thread that the air pressure could be different which would explain why one was not cured The last thing I want to do here is debate something I wrote on another thread, but I suggest you try reading what I wrote before commenting on it: If you read my post you will see that I argue that the industry standard for HBO (100% oxygen at 2 ATA) is too much oxygen at too high an ATA for RSD patients. I said that patients are fortunate that they didn't have adverse outcomes at those levels. Also, I never talk about HBO as a cure...Vic |
I'd like to jump in here quickly and respond to something.
Vicc said: Quote:
We can't expect to to state how another member, or members, should post/respond/question. We can ask, but there are more than just one reading the thread and it's a public thread/conversation, so it doesn't mean that all responding will agree to requests. That's OK. Just as in real life, we can ask but we can't control the other side(s) of a conversation...keeping in mind that conversations evolve with the natural flow as they continue. What we *do* have full control of is our choice whether or not to respond if others still choose to carry on the discussion in the ways they feel the need to. If someone asks what you feel is an inappropriate question, or is redundant, it's your choice not to respond knowing that there are others reading who may want to with the knowledge they have. Also, if you're concerned that others might not have the information from another thread, you can always quote or link in your response *should you choose to respond*. :) Thanks, KD |
bump for anyone who might have missed this.
|
Quote:
I had my HBOT at 2 ATA as did all my fellow chamber mates. It was considered by our HBOT physician that less ATA would not be therapeutic. I would agree that for a small minority of patients 2 ATA maybe too much for them as has been documented on this site by someone who did get worse after her treatment. HBOT does come with risks when in the hands of inexperienced technicians or for those people who may have certain other illnesses or for those who smoke but there is an extremely thorough medical history taken before you are accepted for HBOT and there should always be medical and nursing staff on hand to recognise any problems if they arise. I would suggest that our Physician his hardly likely to play Devil's Advocate and risk our lives at that ATA if he had any major concerns with those he had in the chamber. My only problem was with my first dive which was only 1.5 ATA when I had oxygen toxicity, the other 50 or so dives went without incident for myself or my fellow "divers" I trusted that after I had made many enquiries about the treatment centre that I was referred to and found that it was indeed reputable and had been providing quality care for many years, that I was going to be safe in my treatment----and I was. Am I lucky to have survived 50 or so 2 ATA treatments :confused: No, I don't think so. It was clear we got exactly what our bodies could take and that was no fluke. Cheers Tayla |
Dont understand??
I dont understand why Vic should have to defend his opinion with scientific research when no one else here has to live up to that standard.
Most everyone here is basing their own opinion on what happens, or happened to them. If they do quote some research, it is not the end all word on RSD. In fact there is no sure fire research proving RSD. So what is wrong with someone saying they THINK they have discovered proof of the cause of RSD? I for one dont need people that think they are saving us from seeing something that might not be right. Honestly I think everyone here can make a judgement on whether they believe something or not. What is harping on a couple of points going to prove or disprove anyways? For me it is getting kinda old. That said, momma didnt raise an idiot either. I know I dont have to read the posts that seem to be the same thing over and over, and this WILL be the last post here on this particular subject. I have taken the liberty to post all of Vic's articles in one thread. No I didnt do it here as it is alot of information, and quite frankly im not sure how this forum looks at this kind of thing. I am glad for this forum, and would not want to do anything to hurt my relationships here. Anyways here is the link. Vic did do his homework. http://www.freepowerboards.com/crps/....php?p=238#238 |
Allen,
Yes, it is getting kind of old but I believe important that it is discussed. Vicc is so vigorously wanting to put out a hypothesis about a disease we would all rather not have, that is contrary to what we have been told, researched or believe then I also believe it is the right of people to ask questions on this. Vicc calls himself a "teacher of RSD" then I am afraid this leaves him open to the questioning minds of "his pupils" He has made a statement in his last post about HBOT which is wrong which has the potential to instil fear into someone who was about to undergo this treatment---I make no apologies for bringing this to his notice as someone who has in fact gone through this treatment. Personally, I was/am willing to give his IRI thoughts a chance but any question I ask of how he explains this is not met with what I would call a valid answer according to my medical knowledge or treatment experience. Vicc does ask for our scientific data to prove our point for asking a question and it is supplied frequently in the form of articles and abstracts--if VICC disagrees then he in return will say so. I also believe that people are now aware that this thread is one of this type of discussions and will avoid it if it is going to cause them concern but despite the considerable angst I feel I will continue to ask Vicc to validate his opinions that he so fervently wishes us to believe, just as he asks of us. Regards Tayla |
"I" know "I" said "I" wouldnt post a reply to this topic "redundancy".
Now if you read what Vic has been posting, or even the articles he wrote, you will notice he isnt basing his findings on his experience or what has happened to him. It is from research, all kinds of research. No you dont have to believe it, and yes he did say to prove him wrong. Tayla your posts are full of the letter "I". I challenge you to go back and count how many there are. Even the posts with research from others you answer with I I I. Lets see some answers from you actually based on something other than you. Tayla Quote:
Tayla Quote:
My point exactly. Quote:
It seems to me you have began a personal attack on him because it doesnt line up with your own personal beliefs. |
i usually stay out of things.....but totally agree with you allen
but i too feel vicc is being trashed for NO GOOD REASON..........
he has done so much research on rsd, and is entitled and encouraged to share his findings..........seems to me, if he (we) are not in the little "clique" that this forum seems to have, then we get questioned to pieces..............not saying much for support is it? |
Often in these situations I've learned that the old -"agree to disagree" is best. Otherwise things just go back and forth endlessly with no resolution for anyone.:(
It is so simple to say and mean it :)- "I don't agree with you and that's OK. I hope others will research and decide for themselves what they want to believe." please consider this option. |
I decided to stop posting because I knew one wrong word would get me "suspended"; even saying I thought I had made a reasonable request evoked a lecture on what is reasonable.
Still, at the risk of punishment, I have to point out that I have asked to agree to disagree: Having been stalked through four threads and been deliberately misquoted many, many times, I just wanted to be able to talk about my research. The tactic changed to asking the same questions again and again, and has now changed to the accusation: He has made a statement in his last post about HBOT which is wrong which has the potential to instil fear into someone who was about to undergo this treatment--- Before Tayla made this accusation I had already bumped the Vascular Issues thread back onto page 1 so everyone could read post # 23 and see exactly why I felt 2.0 ATA of HBO could adversely affect RSD patients. I'm sure she had her reasons for making that accusation on this thread rather than the one that explained why I recommend a lower ATA. I'm willing to allow others to speculate on what those reasons are. I did not ask anyone to post in my defense, nor am I orchestrating responses by others. They apparently feel something is amiss and it has gone far beyond simple disagreement. So do I. Now, I will drop back into lurker (or perhaps "suspended") mode...Vic |
Again it is all the same research Vicc you have your opinion on RSD/CRPS which is based on others research you have read, we all agree the research we read are old ,and some just nutty, I saw one the other day saying headachs cause RSD! whats up with that? so if someone comes from a family who is known to have a history of migrains than you will have a good chance to get RSD! come on just like everything it all depends on who is paying for the research.
I believe lets say the Ins. Companies who have to pay out for workers comp or other stuff get research done to get answers like it is all in our head, or having PT in a hospital 24-7 will get rid of it the theory "no pain no gain" sorta thing so we have to understand where did that report you read came from? who paid for it, is it tainted by who is paying for it. Also Vicc you say that you are doing research I have no problem with that, but it is someone elses research you are using and they should get credit for it, but you say over and over these docs are wrong and you attack them. I have a problem there and for you to argue this here is wrong we are just injured people looking for help and you are just making your own opinions without proof! (proof being it is someone elses work,it is not yours did you see actual patients? or run a study?) if you feel your point is right I feel you should present it to the medical field than. Not here in a forum of injuried people who are here to get support from each other. I think you bring up interesting points of view Vicc and I also feel that if some one disagrees with you that you act as though it is a personal attack wich is wrong. Thanks |
I think we will keep this thread temporarily locked for now as it seems to be going in a direction that I do not feel is supportive or informative to the members of this forum who are truly weary of this back and forth!
and no..:Sigh:..no one is being or has been suspended on this issue..... ...............we have just patiently kept asking over and over that people please keep to the TOPIC and please not become personally negative to one another....which includes editing in things that are personal toward someone else a day after initially making a post! I would also like to draw everyone's attention to something that appears at the bottom of every page of Neurotalk: Quote:
this is a forum for *all* the members here. thanks Cheri |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin • Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by
vB Optimise (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.