It is a sad commentary that despite launching a flawed study for seemingly political reasons, Alberta is still among the more cautious provinces in approaching the so-called "Liberation Treatment."
Twenty-ten has certainly been a year of hype for the controversial theory, put forth by Italian researcher Dr. Paolo Zamboni, that CCSVI (chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency) may cause Multiple Sclerosis.
From there, we get the so-called "Liberation Treatment" which involves going in and opening those veins.
While there has been no shortage of news coverage surrounding CCSVI, the past 12 months have also shown us that the hype and the science may be on divergent paths.
A recent editorial in the Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery concluded, "there are a growing number of papers that raise serious questions" about the validity of the CCSVI theory.
Earlier this year, published studies out of Sweden and Germany both found no trend of blockages in MS patients. The German researchers even used the same Doppler screening method as Zamboni.
In late October, a published study out of the Netherlands again found no such association.
Other research is ongoing.
That, however, is no deterrent to the Alberta government, which has launched its own $1-million, three-year "observational study" of those who have undergone the surgery.
In fairness, this is much more responsible that simply diving into clinical trials. The Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR) recently concluded that it was premature to fund any such trials.
The president of the CIHR laid it out quite clearly when he stated that "there is an overwhelming lack of scientific evidence on the safety and efficacy of the procedure, or even that there is any link between blocked veins and MS".
Despite the advice from those we trust to provide us with such advice, provinces such as Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador are pressing ahead with plans to fund clinical trials.
Not to be outdone, New Brunswick has created a $500,000 fund to help patients obtain the surgery out of country.
In light of all of that, Alberta's response seems prudent by comparison.
However, during a television interview last week, the man tabbed to oversee Alberta's study outlined the many weaknesses of this approach.
Dr. Tom Feasby, the Dean of Medicine at the University of Calgary, pointed out that in proper experiments, randomized and blinded controls are needed to make unbiased conclusions.
Without such controls, Dr. Feasby admits that the best we'll get are some "inferences" as to whether there's benefit or harm from the procedure.
So is this a credible scientific endeavour or a political response to a controversial issue?
Many MS patients have been vocal in pressing for government action, and a poll released last week pegged support of government-funded clinical trials at 75 per cent.
Of course, anecdotes cut both ways, and are not evidence in any regard. Polls should hardly be a guide for directing scientific research.
Politicians will be politicians, though.
Last week, even federal Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff got in on the act, declaring that a Liberal government would launch federally-funded clinical trials. And yet, the Liberals would have us believe that it is the Harper government that has disdain for scientific experts and scientific evidence. Maybe no party has a monopoly on such disdain.
Meanwhile, overshadowed by the "Liberation Treatment" hype, has been some groundbreaking research at the University of Alberta. Researchers there discovered that shutting off a key gene causes MS-like symptoms in mice.
The findings were published in The Journal of Biological Chemistry, and may represent a major step forward in understanding what causes MS and how better to treat it in the future.
And how was this all funded? Well, it turns out that like most other scientific research, it went through the typical funding channels -- in this case, the CIHR, Alberta Innovates, and the MS Society.
There is a process for determining the scientific validity of a medical hypothesis and for determining the safety and efficacy of a medical procedure.
Political interference and grandstanding have no place in the equation. Let's hope for less of that in 2011.
The Rob Breakenridge Show airs weeknights from 9 -11 p.m. on AM770 CHQR. rob. breakenridge@corusent.comtwitt er.com/RobBreakenridge
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Read more:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Politics+science+pushing+treatment/4007090/story.html#ixzz18pAriWgb