Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What about a “Cure” in 2006?

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

  • What about a “Cure” in 2006?

    With breakthroughs I mean if there will be documented treatments or studies that can provide improvements to, or treat SCI significantly.

    And pleas comment why you believe so - either way you vote.
    212
    I believe there will be breakthroughs for a cure for chronic SCI
    8.96%
    19
    I believe there will be breakthroughs for a cure for acute SCI
    12.26%
    26
    All of the above
    22.64%
    48
    None of the above
    56.13%
    119

  • #2
    Leif - could you just clarify the definitions of chronic and acute?

    Thanks
    C5/6 incomplete

    "I assume you all have guns and crack....."

    Comment


    • #3
      Oh Leif what a thread starter as if treatments are all set to be offered and statement tempting us..Neways, breakthrough already but i feel there will be approved/Relaible/trustworthy/ treatment somewhere in the world and may be more by the end of the next year but may be not FDA. FDA will still take time . but i wont wait for FDA approved therapy .
      ChemistOnline.in

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by RehabRhino
        Leif - could you just clarify the definitions of chronic and acute?

        Thanks
        RehabRhino – according to Dr. Wise Young the definitions could be like the below quote. Hope it helps, Leif;

        "Chronic spinal cord injury" is usually used to refer to the phase after injury when recovery has reached a plateau. Unfortunately, this is not a good definition because many people with spinal cord injury continues to get some function back years after injury. It is often used in contrast to "acute spinal cord injury" which refers to the early phase after injury during which there may be continuing injury and before the recovery phase. Some people used the term "subacute spinal cord injury" to refer to the phase between acute and chronic but "subacute" usually refers an earlier period during the first days and weeks after injury.

        So, these definitions are quite vague in terms of timing because the timing of each phase depends on injury severity and level. In practice, most clinicians consider the period that is more than one year after injury as "chronic". Acute spinal cord injury generally refers to the first 24 hours after injury. Subacute usually refers to the week or two after injury.

        Personally, I use "acute spinal cord injury" to refer to the first 8 hours after injury and "subacute spinal cord injury" to refer to the first few days after injury. After that, I prefer to use the term "recovery phase" until recovery is no longer occurring. The chronic phase differs from person to person. If the injury is severe, the chronic phase may start earlier at 6-12 months. In a person with a less severe injury, the recovery phase may last years.

        Wise.

        http://carecure.org/forum/showthread...=chronic+acute
        And Shweta – I mean anywhere in the world
        Last edited by Leif; 12-19-2005, 10:02 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Leif,

          Truly meaningful chronic treatments will be tough to accomplish. Acute treatments are just beginning to surface in 2006, and have yet to be proven in humans.

          The labs with the best talent and funding have only recently begun working on chronic treatments, i.e., Reeve-Irvine and the Miami Project (MP). MP has an annual payroll in the multiple millions with 200 full-time researchers, the latest in lab equipment, and good funding. In the summer of 05 they said there may be breakthroughs for chronics in 5 years. As I have stated previously, making a 5 year prediction means they really don't have a clue as to an accurate time frame.

          Hans Kierstad at Reeve-Irvine has made no timeline predictions for chronics, but he was recently interviewed and he indicated his lab is definitely working on chronic lab animals. He has only stated that a chronic treatment is being explored in his lab, nothing else. He is wise not to make a prediction he may not be able to live up to.

          John McDonald is now saying it may be possible within the next 7 years. Dr. Kleinbloesom's group is saying within 5 years. In Dr. Young's "Ten Most Frequently Asked Questions . . . " thread, he stated there may be treatments in 8 years. This was predicted in 2004.

          I don't make predictions, I let the research groups I contact via e-mail or phone or by surfing the net tell me their predictions. But to think a cure for chronics will emerge in 2006 is wishful thinking, and I don't mean that in an offensive way. It simply isn't as close as we would like. No reputable research group is predicting chronic cures in 2006.

          Comment


          • #6
            Schmeky,

            I tend to agree with you on most of your writing, here as well when it comes to chronics. But that’s just me; it would be interesting to hear what others think as well on this dilemma topic.

            Above that there could be some research groups (worldwide) that has not yet publicised their work in scientific/medical publications and journals due to they have been protecting their intellectual property and trade secrets so far – who knows?

            I am also aware that my questions here in this poll could be some provoking – but anyway, a good discussion is always healthy.

            Thanks for commenting and please continue to do so.

            Here is also a quote and comments from John McDonald;

            WORCESTER, Mass., Nov. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Massachusetts-based company Total ReCord, Inc., an early-stage company founded for the specific purpose of developing and commercializing new therapies for neurodegenerative diseases, plans to begin clinical trials in early 2006 with a new treatment for patients with spinal cord injuries.

            RMx(TM), Total ReCord's lead product, is a new non-cellular, non-drug based class of biotherapeutics that draws on the body's natural regenerative processes to stimulate the growth of new central nervous system tissue. "RMx is a promising alternative to embryonic stem cells that may have significant potential in the treatment of spinal cord injuries," says Dr. John McDonald, the Executive VP and Director of the International Center for Spinal Cord Injury at the Kennedy Krieger Institute...
            http://sev.prnewswire.com/medical-ph...2112005-1.html
            And also a link to the same article here on CC; http://carecure.org/forum/showthread...&highlight=RMx

            This is just one group working on the dilemma, there are many more. It will be very interesting to hear what comes out from the ISCITT symposium as well.
            Last edited by Leif; 12-19-2005, 12:14 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              We're about 2 weeks away from DA's "annual" poll. I'd link to the past years' polls, but I'm too lazy.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by cjo
                We're about 2 weeks away from DA's "annual" poll. I'd link to the past years' polls, but I'm too lazy.
                Cjo. Isn’t it so that past years polls are not valid due to the knowledge for biotechnical science is doubled every 3.5 year at the pace it has now? Don’t look back – look forward

                Comment


                • #9
                  Quote From RMx:

                  "There are numerous mechanisms of action that are required. RMx has an impressive 5 mechanisms of action, and that is still not enough for a cure."

                  Reading their e-mail response, RMx says they will test in Europe, but testing will be limited to RMx alone, without any other cellular based treatments. They also indicate RMx will most likely be more effective if combined with cellular treatments, but they don't indicate their testing will be with anything else, just RMx.

                  Obviously they will have to prove safety and efficacy of RMx by itself. There will most likely be a different clinical trial(s) to test RMx combined with other modalities, which can only occur after testing RMx alone. This will most likely take several years to get to the end of the combination testing, i.e., RMx + something else.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I know what you're saying, Leif, and I agree. The old polls would make for an interesting read though. I'm sure I chimed in a time or two.

                    I hope someday we have some sort of equivalent to Bill Gates's "640K ought to be enough for anybody" statement.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The technology is there, they just have to apply it. As much as I rag on mp, mp is the one to watch in 06.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Cjo, Agree – the old polls would have been an interesting read, please link them up when you have time.

                        Schmeky. Agree again, it will take a few years to fix us I believe but it seams like 2006 could be a interesting year, especially for acute SCI and some types of SCI where mostly the axons are damaged - I’m thinking of remyelination. A partial treatment and some improvement are not too bad either.

                        -And like DA indicates here, there could be several approaches.
                        Last edited by Leif; 12-19-2005, 01:28 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Seems like things move sooooo slowly, and since I got hurt a little over 3 yrs ago doesn't seem like much has taken place in the way of a cure. I know since I am a incomplete that people like me would be the last to see any real kind of treatment.
                          So we got to learn to live the best and the happiest way we can with what we have right now. I was pretty down for a while but I have got to where I just go on and try to do everything to my best, if I fail... Oh well I'll just try again.

                          But I keep hoping that somekind of treatment will be found for all the people that are ALOT worse off than I am!!!!!!!!! Will be a Great day when people stand up and throw their chairs in the scrap yard!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I voted for acute - I think its more likely but I say that more in hope than with hard evidence. There are so many variables.

                            I tend to agree with Schmecky - a 'cure' is a long way off........hopefully treatments to limit the extent of an injury or restore partial function/sensation are not.

                            I'd love to be out of the chair but show me a guaranteed treatment which restores my hand function and I'll hand over 100k

                            Actually Duge - as an incomplete I'd always assumed I'd be at the front of the queue where science is concerned as, theoretically, I have more return to 'work with'. Am I being naive?
                            C5/6 incomplete

                            "I assume you all have guns and crack....."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              No, RR, think your roght on,

                              "Actually Duge - as an incomplete I'd always assumed I'd be at the front of the queue where science is concerned as, theoretically, I have more return to 'work with'. Am I being naive?"
                              http://justadollarplease.org/

                              2010 SCINet Clinical Trial Support Squad Member

                              "You kids and your cures, why back when I was injured they gave us a wheelchair and that's the way it was and we liked it!" Grumpy Old Man

                              .."i used to be able to goof around so much because i knew Superman had my back. now all i've got is his example -- and that's gonna have to be enough."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X