Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

INVIVO Articles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    thank you for sharing your views
    "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

    Comment


      #47
      You can be as negative or positive, skeptical or gullible as your heart leads you to be, and god knows you have a right to be. The science is playing out right in front of us now. Im getting a very different vibe from following the research

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by Tbone57 View Post
        You can be as negative or positive, skeptical or gullible as your heart leads you to be, and god knows you have a right to be. The science is playing out right in front of us now. Im getting a very different vibe from following the research
        You have right to be gullible but it is still a negative trait. One should try to not be gullible.

        One person being gullible is not a big deal. When the majority of the SCI community (those who actually care about being cured) is gullible, there are repercussions (ex: Stephen Davies).

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by Nowhere Man View Post
          Sorry, this is meandering. I'm referring to complete injury, which I am.

          Neuroprosthetics. I think that before I die that I will have some functions return. Neuroprosthetics will be the reason.

          I do not see how slapping a bunch of foreign cells into an injury site epicenter will restore function. Especially sensation. The structure of the central nervous system is very complex. A bunch of foreign cells don't know where to go. There is such a thing as neuroplasticity but for a complete restructuring of the spinal cord, that's far fetched. With neuroprosthetics, they one day should be able activate the original targets within reasonable accuracy.

          http://bensmaialab.uchicago.edu/ --> this man should be asked to speak at W2W.

          I have yet to see a rat with a severe and chronic injury recover meaningful function. Therefore, I cannot get excited by current human trials. The only good they provide is quicker answer to SCI community as to if it works or not. I don't see any as a potential treatment. We are at a basic research stage.

          The reason why the scaffold may work in acute SCI is because it is supposed to PRESERVE the normal/original/able-bodied spinal cord. Protect it from dying. Well, mine is gone. It needs to be rebuilt for many inches in length to very specific targets. So if Invivo wants to say scaffold + neural stem cells, that puts them on square 1 as to efficacy. They have absolutely nothing to show as of yet as to how/why it should work. Just like I say to any other lab, show me the animal studies.


          However, I think neural stem cells should still be studied in the lab. Also, I think genetic therapy has a better potential return some movement. It would involve regenerating your host axons. They still wouldn't know where to go but with enough of them crossing maybe some will get lucky. Again, gee therapy is ways off and still needs much more basic research. Hint: SCI should donate to Dr. Murray Blackmore. He is a real scientist.
          What did you think of the French Dr's work? Dr.Courtine I believe with the Epidural implant that causes very little information or tissue damage , The device also uses Neuroprosthetics in conjunction with epidural stimulation. I'm almost certain they use those drugs, because that video was the first time I heard about them. Epidural stimulation has shown not incredible by any means but modest recovery in humans, sexual function is big for all of us. So I think this implant in humans will be very interesting.

          I agree about Dr. Murray Blackmore but his work is so young, we should obviously be donating towards the research. But there's just not much to show for it yet.

          Comment


            #50
            Nowhereman, I am a big miami project supporter, I always hope that they are just being quiet on the technical side but are steadily moving along ...I sort of imagine them swooping in and saving the day, what are your thoughts on them? I used to know a doctor down there and he said that most of their pre-clinical stuff was actually done on mini-pigs?
            "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

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by Nowhere Man View Post
              What if a scaffold + neural stem cells doesn't significantly improve function in chronic SCI (almost a certainty in my mind)? Are there animal studies that show it may?

              It's still great that if it really works, far less people would have to live with severe SCI. It's a hell I wouldn't wish on anybody.
              I was under the impression that invivo stated that they have the largest population of chronicly injured monkeys in the world?
              "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

              Comment


                #52
                Originally posted by Nowhere Man View Post
                What if a scaffold + neural stem cells doesn't significantly improve function in chronic SCI (almost a certainty in my mind)? Are there animal studies that show it may?

                It's still great that if it really works, far less people would have to live with severe SCI. It's a hell I wouldn't wish on anybody.
                A chronic condition can be made acute, wouldn't you agree?

                Comment


                  #53
                  Originally posted by Dlevy View Post
                  A chronic condition can be made acute, wouldn't you agree?
                  Care to explain why you think that?

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Originally posted by lunasicc42 View Post
                    I was under the impression that invivo stated that they have the largest population of chronicly injured monkeys in the world?
                    a) People & companies lie, I'm not saying they are but you have to take it with a grain of salt.

                    b) Didn't Frank Reynolds say that like 4 years ago? Yet are there any research results? Seems like if they were having success..ANY success...we would have heard something.

                    c) Just because they are testing it on chronic monkeys does not mean it will work. I could be testing blue m&m's on the largest population of chronic dogs but that should not give you hope of an imminent cure.

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Originally posted by lunasicc42 View Post
                      Nowhereman, I am a big miami project supporter, I always hope that they are just being quiet on the technical side but are steadily moving along ...I sort of imagine them swooping in and saving the day, what are your thoughts on them? I used to know a doctor down there and he said that most of their pre-clinical stuff was actually done on mini-pigs?
                      I am not a supporter of the Miami Project. I'm not against them either. I have never given them any money. I don't know too much about them and that is their fault. They are too quiet, as you say. I think they focus mostly on acute injury, not chronic. I can't think of any of contributions to chronic SCI research that they have made since I've been injured in 09.

                      I can't assume they are working on chronic SCI behind the scenes quietly. I have to assume they are not! If they want donations, they need to communicate to SCI community directly, and often, specifically describing their current status in labs and near future projects. Maybe they are but I haven't seen/heard it. Their website is vague.

                      They make a lot of money but have very little to show for it in terms of chronic Sci. I understand that much of their government funding is probably restricted to acute SCI. But if I were Marc Buoniconti, a chronic SCI himself, I would revamp my strategy.


                      We can't just assume an organization is just going to swoop in and save the day. We need updates and accountability.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Originally posted by JamesMcM View Post
                        What did you think of the French Dr's work? Dr.Courtine I believe with the Epidural implant that causes very little information or tissue damage , The device also uses Neuroprosthetics in conjunction with epidural stimulation. I'm almost certain they use those drugs, because that video was the first time I heard about them. Epidural stimulation has shown not incredible by any means but modest recovery in humans, sexual function is big for all of us. So I think this implant in humans will be very interesting.

                        I agree about Dr. Murray Blackmore but his work is so young, we should obviously be donating towards the research. But there's just not much to show for it yet.
                        Dr. Blackmore has been at if for just a few years. Patience. There is huge potential in genetics so testing genes must get done. It may take a long time but the sooner it starts, the sooner it will get done. I think right now, potential for efficacy is more important than how soon it can be FDA approved.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Originally posted by Nowhere Man View Post
                          Care to explain why you think that?
                          Wouldn't it be possible to cut out the damaged portion leaving a new acute injury?

                          Comment


                            #58
                            InVivo’s Neuro-Spinal Scaffold used for 2nd spinal cord injury patient

                            Published: January 22, 2015 | Source: beckersspine.com

                            InVivo Therapeutics enrolled the second patient in their Neuro-Spinal Scaffold to treat traumatic spinal cord injury.
                            The patient is enrolled at Carolinas Medical Center, part of the Carolinas HealthCare System in the study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold.
                            Here are five things to know about the procedure:
                            1. Domagoj Coric, MD, chief of neurosurgery at Carolinas Medical Center, performed the procedure with John Ziewacz, MD. Both surgeons are part of the Carolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates and Dr. Coric is a co-principal investigator at the site.
                            2. This is this second-ever spinal surgery performed using the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold to treat acute spinal cord injury. The patient sustained a severe multi-trauma injury requiring two days for medical stabilization before proceeding with the spine surgery and implantation.
                            3. The procedure took place as part of an investigational device exemption pilot study intended to capture preliminary data in five patients who have thoracic spinal cord injury. The company expects to conduct a pivotal study for FDA clearance following this trial.
                            4. Dr. Coric deemed the implantation procedure successful. This surgery came soon after InVivo Therapeutics re-opened their trial. The FDA only requires 30 days of safety day for this second surgery instead of the original 90 days before reopening enrollment.
                            5. If there aren’t significant safety issues, the company anticipates reopening the study for concurrent enrollment of three subjects in about two months.
                            Written by Laura Dyrda
                            InVivo Therapeutics Announces Enrollment of Second Subject in Pilot Spinal Cord Injury Trial
                            - See more at: http://www.spinalcordinjuryzone.com/....ykTiFBw5.dpuf
                            keep (rolling) Walking

                            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

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Originally posted by Dlevy View Post
                              Wouldn't it be possible to cut out the damaged portion leaving a new acute injury?
                              Ok. I'm going to tell you, but please try to remember it in the future. I've repeated this many times. I see you are new so I understand your confusion. When a person has an acute spinal cord injury, their original, beautiful work-of-nature spinal cord is still present. But over the course of a few weeks, their spinal cord literally dies. The tracts that go from the brain to the muscles (simplified) get cut off at the injury site. Above the injury site the axons are still there, but below they die and get disposed of by your body. Sensory tracts that go from muscles to the brain, get cut off at injury site. Below the injury site they are still there, but above the injury site they die and get disposed of. So motor tracts will need to regenerate from the injury site all the way down the entire cord, making exits at the right place. As you know different levels of spinal cord control different muscles. This could be a meter or so in length. The sensory tract needs to regenerate from injury site all the way up to the brain. Could be a meter or more in length. Not only would they need to grow these long distances but they would need to reconnect with their targets or close to. Ex: your foot sensory axon needs to grow to the precise spot in your brain that feels your foot, or at least close.

                              OR, for acute SCI, they can keep the spinal cord from dying! They can preserve the spinal cord, keeping the beautiful and complex circuitry in place. That's what the Invivo scaffold does. It preserves. It does NOT rebuild.

                              So NO, you cannot re-cut a chronic SCI to make it acute again. Our circuitry is already dead and disconnected by many inches - meter in length.

                              However, if a treatment causes axon regeneration (none yet do in a significant amount), then recutting the spinal cord MAY help. May not. No one knows because it hasn't been done that I know of. For a cervical injury it might not be worth the lost function (from recutting) to get what shitty regeneration a treatment may offer.

                              A regenerative treatment will never come close to the original spinal cord that only an acute SCI protective treatment can save.

                              Make sense?

                              I really wish Dr. Wise would add this question, and answer himself, to the 10 most frequently asked questions thread.

                              Comment


                                #60
                                very good but....NEVER say NEVER

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X