A few years ago, MS patients gathered at an FDA panel session to share their voices to have the drug, Tysabri, put back on the market despite its grave side effects. The panel recommended that despite the deathly side effects of the drug, that patients and their doctors should have the right to weigh the risks vs. the benefits themselves to select treatment options. Today, MS patients are in this fight again, demanding the right to be able to choose Liberation.

A Right to Choose: Benefits Vs. Risk.

by Helen Cosburn

Medicine is personal matter. Our health is a personal matter. The actions we take, in the form of drugs, treatments, or lack of treatment for that matter, directly affect our bodies and are our decisions.  So why does it seem that there are so many people intervening in our right to choose?

Multiple Sclerosis patients are a prime example of a group that is denied the right to choose. Multiple Sclerosis, a disease long believed to be a neurological disease is a progressive disease with limited treatment options. Those treatments that are available come with heavy side effects and strong cautions from both the medical community and other patients.

In recent years, Tysabri, a prescription drug intended to reduce flare ups and slow down progression of physical disability in adults with relapsing forms of MS hit the market. Although it showed some promise, it also showed great risk. The drug has serious and sometimes fatal side effects,  so much so that the drug was taken off the American market and then re-introduced. When the FDA met to review to put the drug back on the market, they reported that  patients and the physicians should have the right to decided whether the considerable benefits outweigh the risks.

But wait one minute, is this not the same right thousands of MS patients have been arguing, pleading and hoping for so that they can receive the CCSVI liberation procedure?

Read more ... http://www.ccsvi.mx/the-right-to-choose-benefit-vs-risk