Yet another “newly” performed review was published within the last few days regarding brain atrophy concluding it to be a good prognostic marker for multiple sclerosis (MS).
So in other words, foreseeing the likely outcome of MS, in regards to brain atrophy of a person suffering from MS, was something that was left in doubt before?
This one talks of it being important “especially in the early stages of MS” (2010) and the others have concluded “Atrophy should now be included as an endpoint in trials of disease modifying agents aimed at preventing disability, whether the proposed mechanism of action is anti-inflammatory, re-myelinating or neuroprotective.” (2001) and “Measures of regional brain atrophy were significantly correlated with disability, suggesting that this approach is promising for bridging the gap between clinical and MR imaging findings in MS.” (2005)
There is even a study done, that was was reported by this writer, a month ago about depression and MS and how its more of a physical challenge than it is psychological like it is with people who are not fighting this disease because of the effects of a certain part of our brains and its “shrinkage”.
This obvious layman knows there are differences in objectives and methods used for studies, and that some have such minute differences that it might seem like a complete waste of time; that seemingly the same studies have enough of a difference in them that it can cause conclusions that are a surprise… but, we still have to wonder:
How many years does it take for these researchers to realize that they are covering so much of the same information that they are becoming redundant at times?
It appears as if a researcher gets an idea in his/her head, does absolutely no investigation into whether “this or that” has been done before and how, gathers up a small army of “underlings”, finds the funding and then off they go. Perhaps to make a name for themselves? Or suppose it’s to keep the money flow into their pockets?
Sounds all so callow and crude for sure, but it does make one wonder why. There was an article done by Peter O. Behan, a professor of neurology at the University of Glasgow, where he talks of how there has been an incredible waste of time and money all these years because of the soon to be old mouse model usage among other things.
So, not only have we had many years of conformity of a mouse model that wasn’t working, we also have to deal with repetitive studies such as how brain atrophy is working its way through an MS sufferer’s head.
Linda Haven of Lima has this to say, “Makes one wonder how many more years are going to fly by, reading a fair amount of “same old, same old” before yet another, younger Behan gets tired of watching and comes out with yet another article telling people how ridiculous it has gotten.”
But then again, as Ms. Haven says too, “Maybe we can count on the Zamboni’s of the world to put the breaks on much it?”
For those who live in Lima, Ohio, the Northwestern Ohio MS Chapter can be reached at: 401 Tomahawk Drive , Maumee, OH at (419) 897-7263. They are located approximately an hour and a half from Lima, Ohio and 45 minutes from Findlay, Ohio. For directions please click here at Bing Maps.
Sources: Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 08 Sept., 2010
For any corrections of factual information or to contact the writer please use – [email protected]
Make your voice heard. “Subscribe” above and post your comments, questions and opinions.
Follow Lori Friend on twitter @: twitter.com/lwilsonfriend