Were people really unwilling to have the risk of placebo?
Or were people just not sufficiently interested?
Anyway you can debate that amongst yourselves, I am sure all travellers to CCSVI convention in Canada today will be talking about it.
The sad part is there is not answer and so we will these posts so another 1 down 3 to go.
Zwischenberger BA, Beasley MM, Davenport DL, Xenos ES.Meta-Analysis of the Correlation Between Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency and Multiple Sclerosis.Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2013 Sep 4. [Epub ahead of print]
Comi G, Battaglia M, Bertolotto A, Sette MD, Ghezzi A, Malferrari G, Salvetti M, Sormani M, Tesio L, Stolz E, Zaratin P, Mancardi G; the CoSMo Collaborative Study Group.Observational case-control study of the prevalence of chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency inmultiple sclerosis: results from the CoSMo study. Mult Scler. 2013 Sep . [Epub ahead of print]
BACKGROUND:Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI) has been proposed as a possible cause of MS.
OBJECTIVES:The CoSMo study evaluated the association between CCSVI and MS.
METHODS:The primary end-point of this multicentric, case-control study was to compare the prevalence of CCSVI between patients with MS, patients with other neurodegenerative diseases (ONDs) and healthy controls (HCs). Colour-coded duplex sonography was performed by a sonologist and the images were sent to one of three central sonologists for a second reading. Agreement between local and central sonologists or, in case of disagreement, the predominant judgment among the three central readers, was required for a diagnosis of CCSVI. All readings, data collection and analysis were blinded.
RESULTS:The study involved 35 MS centers across Italy and included 1874 subjects aged 18-55. 1767 (94%) were evaluable: 1165 MS patients, 226 patients with ONDs and 376 HCs. CCSVI prevalence was 3.26%, 3.10% and 2.13% for the MS, OND and HC groups, respectively. No significant difference in CCSVI prevalence was found amongst the three cohorts (MS versus HC, OR = 1.55, 95%CI = 0.72-3.36, p = 0.30; OND versus HC, OR = 1.47, 95%CI = 0.53-4.11, p = 0.46; MS versus OND, OR = 1.05, 95%CI = 0.47-2.39, p = 0.99). High negative and low positive agreement was found between the local and centralized readers.
CONCLUSIONS: CCSVI is not associated with MS.