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:

You may feel that reasonable. Some may agree, others may not. Others may wish to discuss what's here (or elsewhere as it applies) in depth, even revisiting at times.

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.

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 No, I don't think so. It was clear we got exactly what our bodies could take and that was no fluke.
Cheers Tayla

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
What have we been told? Dont all the researchers tell us they have no idea what causes, or even how to effectively treat RSD? What is wrong with putting out a "hypothesis" based on your own research, and not your own experience, which by the way might not be anyone elses experience.

Tayla
Based on who's experience?
My point exactly.


I may be wrong, but Vic said to validate his hypothesis based on research, not one persons experience or knowledge.

It seems to me you have began a personal attack on him because it doesnt line up with your own personal beliefs.

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.