MS may be due to simple jaw problem - Seek a spinal symmetry evaluation before starting drug treatment!

New diagnosis and before diagnosis
81

I see reinforcements have arrived. How nice.

I think we are just 2 of his 100’s of successfully treated patients. They are probably having a good laugh reading all this drivel.

I am not going to get into a debate about any supposed improvements to any patients (although I could quite easily provide you with a list of alternative reasons that are contrary to the proponents’ beliefs), however someone mentioned a doctor. Here I am. I have a PhD in neuroscience. I believe, therefore, that I am at least modestly qualified to give an opinion on the theory underlying this treatment.
Excellent so now we can have a good debate with an educated man.

I have chosen a snippet from the website that EJC nor
mally frequents. It appears to be a direct quote from the orthodontist himself:

“I believe that most “MS lesions” are a consequence of CSF leaking into the brain stroma - they are not lesions in the neural tissue as such otherwise I could not so rapidly correct the symptoms.
The immune system tries to get rid of this fluid which is in the wrong place but is unable to do so and the deposits calcify leading to the typical opaque lesions seen on MRI and CAT scans. At autopsy the increased immune function is wrongly diagnosed as an auto immune disorder.”

You have obviuously not availed yourself about the latest research befiore trying to criticise Dr Amir:
Major Diagnostic Breakthrough in Multiple Sclerosis Achieved With Advanced UPRIGHT® MRIUPRIGHT MRI Scanner and its revolutionary findings confirming what Doctor Amir has said. It has also objectively gone on to confirm cervical asymmetries as the underlying reasons behind MS disabilities. It clearly shows the extravasation of the CSF but says that it leaks into brain parenchyma. Dr Amir’s experience shows that the patients are recovering too quickly for parenchymal damage and he speculated that it may be that the CSF leaks into the brain stroma. He also clearly stated that he remains corrected on this speculation.

Please read this link:

And here is my opinion: I have never read such utter rubbish in my life!

Rubbish to you but life saver for many of us.

The CSF leak part of the theory is ridiculous. I think that we are being asked to believe that pools of CSF lead to some sort of inflammatory response which leads to calcification of the surrounding tissue - much like a broken bone can heal with extra boney growth around it. (I assume this because I cannot believe that anyone even remotely medically aware would suggest that CSF carries calcium into the brain?? - the only other possibility underlying this “idea”.) I will simply point out that, not only is the brain actually bathed in CSF, it moves constantly, is replaced several times a day and is not harmful to brain tissue, calcification is not part of the MS processes! (Incidentally what on earth has connective tissue (stoma) to do with anything?) But we come to the crux of the first sentence: the idea that MS lesions do not involve neurons. This is absolutely laughable! The word demyelination refers to the loss of the myelin coating of axons - axons being part of neurons. You cannot get much more neural than that! Moreover, demyelination is a fact. It is readily visible in wet tissue (i.e. actual brain matter) and there is no way that an expert could not tell the difference between it and calcified tissue.

MS lesions may be causing incapacity as far as you are concerned but the experience of many recovering patients confirms what Dr Amir postulates.

Furthermore, the orthodontist clearly has no understanding of MRI. For a start, MS lesions look bright / white on T2 scans while calcification looks dark / black. There is no way that a radiologist would get the two confused. We get a glimpse into why the error has been made with the phrase “opaque lesions”. OH DEAR! Clearly someone isn’t aware that what shade of gray different types of matter appear on MRI depends on which settings are used to acquire the images. And yep, demyelination and calcification do not look the same on images taken with the same settings.

So calcification looks black Does it now? So teeth should appear black and bone should appear black! I am shocked where you got your doctorate from.

So there we have it.
The whole thing is based on outrageous and nonsensical speculation and gobbledegook. One thing is it not is science.

If your intentions were altruistic you would want to really see the recovering patients, you would want to visit Dr Amir to see whether he really has anything substantive to offer, you would want to see his objective graphical presentations of patient recovery but without having any basis you have the cheec to make libellous claims against him.

82

I have at no point suggested MS Doesn’t exist, what I am suggesting is huge numbers of people are being wrongly diagnosed with “MS”.

83

[quote=“brog64”]

Spreading misinformed garbage is incredibly irresponsible in the Forum.
[/quote] Exactly!

84

EJC, I didn’t quote you directly. I said, “you now appear to be saying…” meaning that having read your comment quoted above (and highlighted in bold) combined with Dr Amir’s statements gives the impresion you are saying that MS is more often misdiagnosed than correctly diagnosed and that the majority of MS patients are being mistreated for a condition they don’t have. This leaves the reader with the impression that the very existence of MS itself is doubtful in your mind and that spinal misalignement is far more likely a cause for the myriad of symptoms known collectively as MS.

Are you now saying that MS IS in fact a neurological disease of the Central Nervous System caused by an auto-immune disorder and NOT a spinal misalignemt after all? That a handful of people may have a completely DIFFERENT condition called TMJ (teromandibular joint disorder) and would therefore benefit from seeing an orthodontist? In which case why don’t you go and talk about it on the TMJ boards as THAT condition is clearly NOT MS.

Belinda

85

You know, it would be nice to read some acknowledgement of my long post. It was supportive of the problems that spasticity and spasms do to the body.

Answer some of the other posters - people with MS’s posts in a polite and respectful manner? Is is so hard to have a discussion?

I went to TIMS (been a member for years) and read about your wife’s progress. It’s been a bit up and down hasn’t it?

I would expect that by the end of next year, that she’ll still be relying on you for balance. Her muscle wastage will take a long time to improve. My right leg is wasted, so I exercise it a lot - but it will always be thinner than the left.

Let’s face facts. You’ve been brainwashed by the worst shills on TIMS. You won’t answer anyone’s points here - Geoff explained how Copaxone works. ANYONE can find out how it works.

I took time to explain why I think Dr Amir isn’t helping himself with his bad understanding of how MS works. Why don’t you answer my points? Or even acknowledge that spasms and spasticity can be alleviated with therapy - massage, orthodentistry or chiropractic therapy? I think I deserve a response to that.

86

Before I get to my main points, I would like to explain that it is normal practice to cite a study that you agree with in support of your own theory. Incidentally, were you aware that “all but one [of the MSers in this study] were found to have a history of serious prior cervical trauma which resulted in significant cervical pathology” and that (rather unsurprisingly?) “In all but one MS patient, anatomic pathologies were found to be more severe in the upright position than in the recumbent position. Similarly, CSF flow abnormalities were found to be more severe in the upright position than in the recumbent position in all but one MS patient.”

Well, there we go: a small study of people with MS who had previous trauma causing significant damage to their neck had CSF flow abormalities. How enlightening. Hmm. Maybe not!

But then, your orthodontist doesn’t agree with it anyway. Instead, he has his own theory: it’s not demyelination, it’s calcification.

You did not even begin to address my challenges to the orthodontist’s belief that MS lesions do not cause neural damage, but Belinda has already unequivocally explained the reality of demyelination so I will restrict myself to your comment about calcification and MRI:

“So calcification looks black Does it now? So teeth should appear black and bone should appear black! I am shocked where you got your doctorate from.”

Fwiw, my PhD is from the University of London. However, even a first year undergraduate student could tell you how ludicrous your comment is. In fact, when I read it, I actually laughed and spent the next 10 minutes grinning - thanks for that :slight_smile:

A clue to why I found it funny was the words “T2 scans” in my earlier reply. A brief, very basic lesson in MRI:

MR scanners can be set to acquire data in several different ways. Different types of matter emit different levels of signal based on these settings. The signal data are transformed into images using complex mathematics (for those who are interested, Fourier maths). High signal appears bright in the images. Low signal appears dark in the images. The same tissue can be made to appear any shade of gray, depending on which settings are used. If we take a very basic example, the brain’s white matter and gray matter have sufficiently different characteristics that they look different on MRI. In a T1 scan, white matter looks pale and gray matter looks darker (CSF looks black). In a T2 scan, white matter looks dark and gray matter looks pale (CSF looks white). So there we have it.

Calcification and demyelination look different and, on T2 scans, calcification is dark/black whereas demyelination is bright/white! I’d love you to try and explain how any radiologist would fail to notice this?

PS “Objective” graphs? Self report is not classed as an objective measure. It doesn’t matter how many pretty pictures one produces, the data are still subjective.

87

Got another for you. Do you think brain and spinal cord turning to bone night have been picked up before? Think autopsy, I can see it now…Doctor 1…" Blow me down, this persons brain and spinal cord has turned to bone!"

Doctor 2. " Good gosh, so MS IS calcification of CSF!!!"

Didnt happen did it?

Load of rubbish isn’t it?

88

Geoff,

Have you ever read this letter from the FDA to Teva?

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/EnforcementActivitiesbyFDA/WarningLettersandNoticeofViolationLetterstoPharmaceuticalCompanies/UCM296204.pdf

89

So EJC, you now appear to be saying that MS doesn’t actually exist and that people with MS have been misdiagnosed and have something else wrong with them that is not even necessarily neurological.

I stand by it. My statements do not need your approval. This is a fact that is glaringly obvious to very many patients now. I would like to ask a very simple question based on this question and your response. Why are you here right now on this forum?

90

EJC, I didn’t quote you directly. I said, “you now appear to be saying…” meaning that having read your comment quoted above (and highlighted in bold) combined with Dr Amir’s statements gives the impresion you are saying that MS is more often misdiagnosed than correctly diagnosed and that the majority of MS patients are being mistreated for a condition they don’t have. This leaves the reader with the impression that the very existence of MS itself is doubtful in your mind and that spinal misalignement is far more likely a cause for the myriad of symptoms known collectively as MS.

Please read this article. It is very long and needs dedication to understand. Then try and show me where your hypothesis is correct and where this hugely knowledgeable people have gone wrong. Their finding is that MS is due physical asymmetries much like Dr Amir has been saying for more than 12 years. His contentions have now been objectively supported.

Are you now saying that MS IS in fact a neurological disease of the Central Nervous System caused by an auto-immune disorder and NOT a spinal misalignemt after all?

No I am saying that a huge number of patients have been misdiagnosed as MS patients when their symptoms have been due to bodily asymmetries as proven beyond doubt by Dr Amir.
That a handful of people may have a completely DIFFERENT condition called TMJ (teromandibular joint disorder) and would therefore benefit from seeing an orthodontist? In which case why don’t you go and talk about it on the TMJ boards as THAT condition is clearly NOT MS.

This forum is for MS patients. When they have objectively read all that is here many will probably move over to the TMD forums as per your very wise suggestion.

91

[quote=“Samantha72”] So EJC, you now appear to be saying that MS doesn’t actually exist and that people with MS have been misdiagnosed and have something else wrong with them that is not even necessarily neurological.

I stand by it. My statements do not need your approval. This is a fact that is glaringly obvious to very many patients now. I would like to ask a very simple question based on this question and your response. Why are you here right now on this forum? [/quote]

I believe far too many people are being misdiagnosed.

At no point have I ever said I do not believe MS does not exist, these words have been continually put in my mouth by previous posters.

I stand by my statement that I beleive too many people are being misdiagnosed.

92

I think I’m getting a picture of EJC here. He is actually trying to find any way he can to help his wife which is an admirable and understandable thing. He recognises that Dr Amir isn’t helping true MS sufferers but is helping those misdiagnosed with MS but who actually have a misalignment problem instead. His wife, who does have real MS is also gaining some help from realignment, which is brilliant - any relief is obviously welcome.

But, he is heavily influenced by Dr Amir’s claims and statements leading to an almost cult following approach. Dr Amir is the instigator of the dangerous and inaccurate misinformation being thrown around. He has sucked people into his little game and those people, in turn, are becoming his advocats - spreading his word. It is those words which are being bandied around as gospel but which, under scrutiny, are utter, uneducated, unsubstantiated, hogwash.

Jen (who started this post) is also a victim subscribed to spread the Amir word. (Not dismilar to JWs really - spreading the false word but utterly brainwashed into believing it’s the absolute, ultimate truth.)

Luckily, we are more objective on here and better taught. We have our resident PhD Neuroscientist who only uses substantial and scrutinised evidence from the neurological field. Everyone should always take an objective approach when dealing with such matters, ensuring the road they take or preach is verified by several authentic sources. Pie in the sky claims by one practitioner should always be taken suspicially until they solidly stand up to scrutiny. This is clearly not the case with Dr Amir’s statements and EJC would do well to recognise this. By all means he should do whatever he can to ensure his wife is as well as possible and he can pass on the news and the approach they take. However, to pass on Dr Amir’s false, misleading and dangerous beliefs and teachings as fact is preposterous. Let’s stop here.

93

[quote=“Samantha72”] So EJC, you now appear to be saying that MS doesn’t actually exist and that people with MS have been misdiagnosed and have something else wrong with them that is not even necessarily neurological.

I stand by it. My statements do not need your approval. This is a fact that is glaringly obvious to very many patients now. I would like to ask a very simple question based on this question and your response. Why are you here right now on this forum? [/quote]

Samantha, I love it!!! I think your question says it all!

Belinda

94

EJC, responding to Moyna, asked

“Is a cardiac surgeon more qualified than a Neurologist to comment on what is and what isn’t MS or what is and what isn’t suitable treatment?”

Readers can easily see that this is not what Moyna said. She did cite a surgeon who had been given the treatment for CCSVI.
She also referred to an eye surgeon. Given the number of nerve cells in a single human eyeball (more than 150 million), I would expect an eye surgeon to have an excellent knowledge of that part of the nervous system - which does, of course, include parts of the brain.

EJC also says:

How is you seem to know - yet the Copaxone nurse, the Nuero and even Teva can’t answer these questions after Emma having taken the drug for over a year?

So tell me how it works, what exactly does it do? I can’t seem to get a straight answer to that question.

I note that there has been reference to both a “Neurosurgeon” and a “Neurologist” in relation to Emma’s treatment. Anyone who does not know the distinction between the two specialities is unable to grasp a long technical explanation involving the presumed effects of Copaxone on certain T-cells (let alone the difference between the different types of T-cell). I would also suggest that demanding answers that one is unable to comprehend is not the way to establish good relations with anyone.

I also note that in a different thread, there is an uncomplimentary reference to “Emma’s Neurologist” at the East Surrey Hospital, along with a comment that the man has 500,000 patients. Really?!!!
Since the population of Surrey is given as 1.1 million (by Surrey County Council), that one person has half the population as patients is stretching credulity a great deal. One wonders what the neurology people at Frimley Park, and the Royal at Guildford would say to this claim.

Turning to the treatment offered by “Dr” Amir …
I note that he studied the “Atlas Balance” approach in Germany. So I looked up Atlas Balance - amongst the many things that this “treatment” is supposed to cure is Dyslexia. Now I know that some people deny that Dyslexia exists, while others consider that it is a problem with the “feature detectors” that are created by the network of nerve cells in the eyes. Since the pathway from eye to brain does not go anywhere near the spine/neck/jaw, I regard this as suspicious. I see that the same claim is made in the middle of the long, long list of conditions that “Dr” Amir claims to have treated satisfactorily.

What I can state, with total confidence, is that “Dr” Amir would have great trouble trying to attach any of his devices to me - and hence that he would not be able to alter the alignment of my jaw.

Geoff

95

“Please read this article. It is very long and needs dedication to understand. Then try and show me where your hypothesis is correct and where this hugely knowledgeable people have gone wrong. Their finding is that MS is due physical asymmetries much like Dr Amir has been saying for more than 12 years. His contentions have now been objectively supported.
http://www.fonar.com/news/100511.htm”

The link takes us to an article about an article. It is not very long and only contains the bare information which is actually very easy to understand if you have the right knowledge. To read the whole article (which is long), you need to follow the link at the bottom. (Which I have done.)

I’m not going to go into the issues I have with this study as it would be much too technical and should really be directed at the authors, however (and you will have to take my word for it) there is nothing in this article to remotely support the proposal that MS lesions are in fact calcification or that MS lesions do not cause neural damage or that MS lesions do not cause symptoms.

The authors also do not say that MS is due to physical assymetries. They say that trauma may play a role in the development of MS (although their logic is not properly explained or especially supported with their own data). The rest of the discussion reads much like a sales pitch for their patented scanner to be used to monitor flow in CCSVI treatment.

The paper was published more than a year ago. In that time, it has been cited only once, in a review paper regarding CCSVI.

I guess the MS research community didn’t get terribly excited by it. I wonder why?

Geoff, if you are reading this, you really must go and have a look at the stats in the paper. You will love it (not) :slight_smile:

96

OK, Karen, I did read the whole paper.

Stat? What stats? ROTFLMAO. And this is supposed to be a scientific paper? No Way. NFW!

What I did notice was that:
a - Some of the illustrations were borrowed from other researcher’s work. (Yes, they were properly acknowleged, but you would think that the guy whose company produces the scanner that is shamelessly plugged throughout the paper could have done better.
b - The time between submission and acceptance is the shortest I have ever seen - just two weeks.

One could be charitable and assume that the journal were desperately short of material for that issue (and this does not say a lot for the credibility of the journal). The other possibility does not reflect well on either the Authors or the Editor.

One could wonder how EJC came by that particular reference … And, what does he think that it proves …

Geoff

97

Thought you might enjoy it (for all the wrong reasons!!!)

Kx

98

This has been an interesting ( and sometimes heated) discussion. I must admit that I cannot see how alignment could cure MS, maybe it does help with some of the symptoms after all the human body is not made up of little “boxes” everything is interlinked. However maybe thinking outside the box can lead to other discoveries - look at stomach ulcers - thought to be caused by stress and psychological disorders so I am sure to begin with the 2 scientists who discovered that it was bacterial and could be cured with antibiotics had a hard time convincing the medical fraternity.

After all my reading over the last few weeks and my chat with the neurologist who freely admits that they only know about 20% of what they should know - surely there are so many factors involved in MS that it is not one thing at all there must be so many factors that cause this monster of a disease.

99

I have read both the link supplied by EJC and the attached paper and rolled around laughing. It read as one massive sales pitch for a very odd MRI machine which as far as I can see from numerous google searches has been bought by NO reputable hospitals or research facilities. All this machine and its associated advertising pitch appears to be doing is to try and cash in on the CCSVI market which is rapidly becoming a fizzler anyway.

As far as a rigourous scientific study goes this fails on just about every parameter.

  1. The sample size is too small. 8 particiapnts? 8??? Statistcally irrelevant.

  2. Where is the control group? Without studying people without MS the whole study is totaly pointless. This so called phenomena may be totally physiologically normal.

  3. And in the absence of a control group double blif=ding was impossible therefore the MRI tecnicians running the study knew that each person being studied had MS and therefore the interpretations were left open to bias.

And that destrys any validity of the results without een having to know anything about MS, MRIs or having any specialist knowledge.

If this study had really made such ground breaking studies as you sem to think it does EJC don’t you think it would have made head line news i the MS comunity by now? Or are e gooing to enter into a wholediscussion on Big Paharma supresing any data that doesn’t support and mediation based treatment method for MS?

Look, EJC, I am glad that your wife is feeling better for what ever reason, but please stop trying to convince people of half baked loony theories that simpy do not hold water on the slightest bit of considered thought. You are working on ideas from the lunatic fringe andwhile that may be your perogative, it is not your right to tell every body that the accepted body of science is completely wrong and that only a handful of self serving quacks have got it right.

Belinda

100

Fundamentally this is what all the fuss is about.

Is it too much to ask that people consider other avenues than the well trodden path that leads to nothing?

I ask nothing other than people be open minded and accept that alternative theories and treatments are something that shows possible promise and hope where conventional medicine currently fails.

Helicobacter pylori is the perfect example. At the time the scientist that suggested this was the primary cause of Peptic Ulcer Disease were pilloried, almost a complete laughing a stock. How that changed as they collected their Noble prize.

What I am asking is open your mind. For 160 years the idea of MS being an Autoimmune condition has failed to be proven. Do you think it’s time people started looking outside the box?