Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Spinal Cord Injury—Past, Present, and Future 2007

  1. #1

    Spinal Cord Injury—Past, Present, and Future 2007

    Now, doctors have the great technology which helps them to move quickly then the doctors in the past.




    Spinal Cord Injury—Past, Present, and Future 2007



    Summary:
    This special report traces the path of spinal cord injury (SCI) from ancient times through the present and provides an optimistic overview of promising clinical trials and avenues of basic research. The spinal cord injuries of Lord Admiral Sir Horatio Nelson, President James A. Garfield, and General George Patton provide an interesting perspective on the evolution of the standard of care for SCI. The author details the contributions of a wide spectrum of professionals in the United States, Europe, and Australia, as well as the roles of various government and professional organizations, legislation, and overall advances in surgery, anesthesia, trauma care, imaging, pharmacology, and infection control, in the advancement of care for the individual with SCI.

    Keywords: Spinal cord injuries, Spinal cord medicine, History, Munro, Donald, Guttman, Ludwig, Young, John, Bors, Ernest, Comarr, A. Estin, Rossier, Alain
    Go to:
    INTRODUCTION
    As with most other topics, in order to acquire a complete understanding of spinal cord injury (SCI), one must appreciate the events that comprise its past, present, and future. This “trinity of time” for SCI has a most interesting past, an exciting present, and a very promising future.

    Go to:
    THE PAST—AN AILMENT NOT TO BE TREATED
    Nowadays, in science as in industry, much emphasis is placed on the future and the shaping of the present so that it leads directly to some desired outcome. Often overlooked in the planning of such quests are the events that have preceded them and how they have shaped the present. Understanding those events can give one a better grasp of the reasons that justify one's pursuits. We tend to forget the admonition of the well-known Spanish philosopher, George Santayana (1863–1952) who while teaching at Harvard University in the US said, “Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness…. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” (1) This advice is especially worth remembering when it comes to SCI, which actually has a rich, absorbing past that harks back a long way to roughly 2,500 years BCE. We know this from the writings inscribed in the Edwin Smith surgical papyrus.

    read...

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2031949/

  2. #2
    It's a really good read and I'm only three quarters of the way through.
    Those who don't think that cure is possible or unrealistic should really read this.
    If everyone took this view we would still be dealing with sci as an ailment not to be treated.
    Once we move from people dying right away, then fying years later, to a situation when the life expectancy gap is closing; it's natural that the next step is cure.
    Dennis Tesolat
    www.StemCellsandAtomBombs.blogspot.com

    "Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom."
    Martin Luther King

  3. #3
    It seems that a large part of the battle has to do with the pessimism or even nihilism of some people, who simply cannot and will not believe that spinal cord injury can be cured. This is what is holding down the Rick Hansen Foundation. It may be why the RHI is not anxious to seem to be wild-eyed cure advocates, because they fear condemnation by conservative doctors and scientists who believe that a cure is not possible.

    Some time ago, I gave up fighting the anti-cure people. They believe what they believe and the only thing that can turn them around is time (people die and their pessimism dies with them) or evidence to prove that they are wrong. In the 1970's, people did not believe that anything could restore function in spinal cord injury. If you had a "complete" spinal cord injury, they will not even operate on you to decompress your spinal cord because it would do no good.

    Instead, I decided to just do what I believe and do it the best that I can. If my ideas are right, they will be supported by the evidence and successful restoration of function. I have become less vehement about this as well. On the other hand, I was quite depressed by the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. What I saw were mostly people giving excuses why they could not do clinical trials. Yes, yes, it is hard, it takes money, and it is a lot of work. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible. It can be done.

    We had did it with high-dose methylprednisolone. Everybody said that it couldn't be done and the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (NASCIS) was the first double-blind randomized placebo controlled multicenter trial. Now all these people are shooting down methylprednisolone even though they have not come up any evidence to the contrary. They are taking potshots at a 30 year old therapy without coming up with any treatment that is better.

    I got that same feeling at the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. There were lots of people making excuses why a cure is not possible and very few trying to do it.

    Wise.

  4. #4
    Senior Member lunasicc42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Lutz, Fl USA*********C456
    Posts
    2,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Wise Young View Post
    It seems that a large part of the battle has to do with the pessimism or even nihilism of some people, who simply cannot and will not believe that spinal cord injury can be cured. This is what is holding down the Rick Hansen Foundation. It may be why the RHI is not anxious to seem to be wild-eyed cure advocates, because they fear condemnation by conservative doctors and scientists who believe that a cure is not possible.

    Some time ago, I gave up fighting the anti-cure people. They believe what they believe and the only thing that can turn them around is time (people die and their pessimism dies with them) or evidence to prove that they are wrong. In the 1970's, people did not believe that anything could restore function in spinal cord injury. If you had a "complete" spinal cord injury, they will not even operate on you to decompress your spinal cord because it would do no good.

    Instead, I decided to just do what I believe and do it the best that I can. If my ideas are right, they will be supported by the evidence and successful restoration of function. I have become less vehement about this as well. On the other hand, I was quite depressed by the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. What I saw were mostly people giving excuses why they could not do clinical trials. Yes, yes, it is hard, it takes money, and it is a lot of work. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible. It can be done.

    We had did it with high-dose methylprednisolone. Everybody said that it couldn't be done and the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (NASCIS) was the first double-blind randomized placebo controlled multicenter trial. Now all these people are shooting down methylprednisolone even though they have not come up any evidence to the contrary. They are taking potshots at a 30 year old therapy without coming up with any treatment that is better.

    I got that same feeling at the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. There were lots of people making excuses why a cure is not possible and very few trying to do it.

    Wise.
    I wish this post had a "like " button
    "That's not smog! It's SMUG!! " - randy marsh, southpark

    "what???? , you don't 'all' wear a poop sac?.... DAMNIT BONNIE, YOU LIED TO ME ABOUT THE POOP SAC!!!! "


    2010 SCINet Clinical Trial Support Squad Member
    Please join me and donate a dollar a day at http://justadollarplease.org and copy and paste this message to the bottom of your signature

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Wise Young View Post
    It seems that a large part of the battle has to do with the pessimism or even nihilism of some people, who simply cannot and will not believe that spinal cord injury can be cured. This is what is holding down the Rick Hansen Foundation. It may be why the RHI is not anxious to seem to be wild-eyed cure advocates, because they fear condemnation by conservative doctors and scientists who believe that a cure is not possible.

    Some time ago, I gave up fighting the anti-cure people. They believe what they believe and the only thing that can turn them around is time (people die and their pessimism dies with them) or evidence to prove that they are wrong. In the 1970's, people did not believe that anything could restore function in spinal cord injury. If you had a "complete" spinal cord injury, they will not even operate on you to decompress your spinal cord because it would do no good.

    Instead, I decided to just do what I believe and do it the best that I can. If my ideas are right, they will be supported by the evidence and successful restoration of function. I have become less vehement about this as well. On the other hand, I was quite depressed by the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. What I saw were mostly people giving excuses why they could not do clinical trials. Yes, yes, it is hard, it takes money, and it is a lot of work. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible. It can be done.

    We had did it with high-dose methylprednisolone. Everybody said that it couldn't be done and the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (NASCIS) was the first double-blind randomized placebo controlled multicenter trial. Now all these people are shooting down methylprednisolone even though they have not come up any evidence to the contrary. They are taking potshots at a 30 year old therapy without coming up with any treatment that is better.

    I got that same feeling at the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. There were lots of people making excuses why a cure is not possible and very few trying to do it.

    Wise.
    What I see is that the pessimists have a cultural control of the field and before they die they educate enough people so that nothing change.

    IMO we need to stop being polite with the pessimists as they are not kind enough to really listen to us & their attitude keeps us paralized.
    A few scattered advocates speaking up here & there just look like the idiot of the village.
    A harder and more organized approach is needed to have an impact or all our effort will not change a thing.

    Paolo
    In God we trust; all others bring data. - Edwards Deming

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Wise Young View Post
    It seems that a large part of the battle has to do with the pessimism or even nihilism of some people, who simply cannot and will not believe that spinal cord injury can be cured. This is what is holding down the Rick Hansen Foundation. It may be why the RHI is not anxious to seem to be wild-eyed cure advocates, because they fear condemnation by conservative doctors and scientists who believe that a cure is not possible.

    Some time ago, I gave up fighting the anti-cure people. They believe what they believe and the only thing that can turn them around is time (people die and their pessimism dies with them) or evidence to prove that they are wrong. In the 1970's, people did not believe that anything could restore function in spinal cord injury. If you had a "complete" spinal cord injury, they will not even operate on you to decompress your spinal cord because it would do no good.

    Instead, I decided to just do what I believe and do it the best that I can. If my ideas are right, they will be supported by the evidence and successful restoration of function. I have become less vehement about this as well. On the other hand, I was quite depressed by the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. What I saw were mostly people giving excuses why they could not do clinical trials. Yes, yes, it is hard, it takes money, and it is a lot of work. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible. It can be done.

    We had did it with high-dose methylprednisolone. Everybody said that it couldn't be done and the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (NASCIS) was the first double-blind randomized placebo controlled multicenter trial. Now all these people are shooting down methylprednisolone even though they have not come up any evidence to the contrary. They are taking potshots at a 30 year old therapy without coming up with any treatment that is better.

    I got that same feeling at the Rick Hansen Foundation meeting in Vancouver. There were lots of people making excuses why a cure is not possible and very few trying to do it.

    Wise.
    Just to talk about your two points (and I don't know if you're trying to connect them or not, but it looks to be the case).
    I pretty much agree with not trying to convince individuals about cure, because I don't see the point. If the other person believes in cure or not, is not going to make cure happen any quicker.
    But on the other hand, I don't find the current activity in regards to the Rick Hansen Foundation, to be about trying to convince them about cure. In my mind we are not having polemics with RHF about the cure, we are simply trying to make sure that MONEY that is raised under the slogan 'a world without paralysis after spinal cord injury' is used for the purpose of cure. It's like trying to liberate money, not a political discussion.
    If people push, we can get them to fund cure. If we let them off the hook, they may even take cure money in that should go elsewhere. This way here RHF can decide. Fund cure or drop the cure talk and let that money go organizations that will spend it for that.
    Last edited by StemCells&AtomBombs; 06-06-2012 at 03:09 AM.
    Dennis Tesolat
    www.StemCellsandAtomBombs.blogspot.com

    "Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom."
    Martin Luther King

Similar Threads

  1. Spinal Cord Injury Walk 2007
    By jplw in forum Funding, Legislation, & Advocacy
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-11-2007, 08:10 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2007, 06:13 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 03:44 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-01-2003, 11:38 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-21-2001, 12:34 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •