Dr. Douglas Kiester discusses MAGEC - Remote Control Spinal Deformity System

[flerc]

Sharon, I understand what you said and yes, it was a wrong interpretetion I did, the direct connection of that experiment and Dr. Kiester's claim. It was enough clear what he said and also the conclusion of the study. I made a so quick read, maybe because that claim seemed to me really so reasonable and according some facts (as I suppose). I have heard many times before that ligaments turns stiff after growth, so the same occurs with the spine and the Zlatta’s study showed that a superflexibility is because inmature ligaments. Also I remain sure that only a back component is the guilty of a stiff spine and muscles and ligaments seems to be the more suspected, so a theory about a tight ligament seems to be extremely logic for me. I had not time yet to read all again, so I’m not sure about that, but I believe that there are other important clues related with Magec.

Thanks

[Pooka1]

Okay one more thing... I do NOT think MAGEC has been SHOWN to address the tight ligament that Kiester is claiming causes scoliosis even thugh Kiester helped develop it. It is just another variation on a growing rod that has been around for a while and works on the same principle of multiple small extensions over time to keep up with growth and avoid the effects of the anterior overgrowth I assume. There is no evdience it addresses a particular ligament and the exact ligament that Kiester is talking about to my knowledge.

The only difference between MAGEC and other growth rods is that MAGEC can be extended from outside the body and doesn't require a small surgery every 6 months to increase the length. Otherwise it is just a growth rod and is likely subject to the same major problem that other growth rods have, namely that later extensions do not work as well as earleir ones. It seems to be self-limiting maybe because the spine starts trying to fuse from the lack of movement due to the rods being present. I am hoping that the more numerous smaller extensions with MAGEC can avoid that problem. Who knows.

[flerc]

I must be a little slow.

This video explains the MAGEC system. It was already posted in another thread but for some reason I thought this was a competitor's device.

Here is the article in the Daily Mail about the MAGEC system.
Now I can walk tall... all thanks to my remote controlled bionic spine

Thanks Dingo, I saw it before, but although I can (not so simply ) read and write English and also speak, I'm absolutely unable to understand a conversation.. I will ask for help.. I saw that others surgeons seems to believe in the ligament theory..

[flerc]

Okay one more thing... I do NOT think MAGEC has been SHOWN to address the tight ligament that Kiester is claiming causes scoliosis even thugh Kiester helped develop it. It is just another variation on a growing rod that has been around for a while and works on the same principle of multiple small extensions over time to keep up with growth and avoid the effects of the anterior overgrowth I assume. There is no evdience it addresses a particular ligament and the exact ligament that Kiester is talking about to my knowledge.

Yes, this is the point! This must to be known.

[Ballet Mom]

Isn't it interesting that Kiester appears to be spending time telling the JPL cosmologists how to do their research and spending time designing earth-based experiments to show that the Big Bang never happened INSTEAD of designing earth-based experiments to SHOW that the tight ligament hypothesis is correct?

Perhaps time spent writing a book about medieval religious mumbo jumbo takes up too much of his time to actually show the tight ligament theory is correct. Who knows.

You simply don't understand good engineers and the way they think. This is what the National Engineering Honor Society puts in their publication for the engineers to have fun with in their spare time. They like puzzles to solve. It really doesn't matter what subject....unlike scientists who apparently like to scare away other people questioning their results by saying that only the top people in their field could possibly have a valid opinion.

http://www.tbp.org/pages/Publications/Bent/BTs/W11.pdf


If you have spare time, feel free to solve all the Brain Ticklers. They appear to have them online. Enjoy.

http://www.tbp.org/pages/publications/Bent/BTs.cfm

[Ballet Mom]

I mean what do parents of kids with scoliosis want more, a handle on what is causing the curvature and rotation or yet another book on medieval religious mumbo jumbo and edifying the "idiot" researchers at JPL on the lack of a Big Bang?

I ask the jury...

Perhaps the evangelical atheists who are so noticeably loud these days could use this advice.

[Ballet Mom]

Okay one more thing... I do NOT think MAGEC has been SHOWN to address the tight ligament that Kiester is claiming causes scoliosis even thugh Kiester helped develop it. It is just another variation on a growing rod that has been around for a while and works on the same principle of multiple small extensions over time to keep up with growth and avoid the effects of the anterior overgrowth I assume. There is no evdience it addresses a particular ligament and the exact ligament that Kiester is talking about to my knowledge.

The only difference between MAGEC and other growth rods is that MAGEC can be extended from outside the body and doesn't require a small surgery every 6 months to increase the length. Otherwise it is just a growth rod and is likely subject to the same major problem that other growth rods have, namely that later extensions do not work as well as earleir ones. It seems to be self-limiting maybe because the spine starts trying to fuse from the lack of movement due to the rods being present. I am hoping that the more numerous smaller extensions with MAGEC can avoid that problem. Who knows.

From my personal experience, Dr. Kiester's theory fits what I saw with my daughter better than any other theory out there. There did appear to be a tether somewhere that would cause my daughter's curve to look bigger and her scapula to stick out during her growth spurts. Maybe you have to be an engineer to understand mechanical forces acting upon something. I will certainly give him the benefit of the doubt until proved otherwise.

As to MAGEC being basically the same as the other growth rods, I don't believe that to be the case. I believe that some part of the spine is fused when placing growing rods or shilla rods. And then the spine is fused following enough growth. With Dr. Kiester's invention, the spine is not fused and the rod is removed after growth. An absolutely phenomenal result!


"Question) Is the system removed or turned off when the patient reaches skeletal maturity?

Dr. Kiester) There is nothing in the rod to turn off. The "motor" is a magnet. That's it. A simple magnet which rotates on a threaded screw. The plan is to remove the rods once the stretching is done. This involves one small incision on each end of the rod so that the anchors can be removed. The rod is then pulled out though one of those small incisions. Anytime there is metal around bone that is moving, the metal will eventually loosen, and/or break. There is no fusion with this rod. The spine is fully mobile at the end of treatment. The spine does not get stiff or fuse. Thus the rod needs to be removed."

[flerc]

As to MAGEC being basically the same as the other growth rods, I don't believe that to be the case. I believe that some part of the spine is fused when placing growing rods or shilla rods. And then the spine is fused following enough growth. With Dr. Kiester's invention, the spine is not fused and the rod is removed after growth. An absolutely phenomenal result!

Certainly for parents of kids, it has not any importance if the outcome may be explained because that lgament theory or other ligament or some muscle..the important for them is that scoliosis problem may be solved with a reversible surgery!
If Magec really works and all other growth rods does some kind of fusion, then a new paradigm arises in the scoliosis world. All resources should to be used in this direction.. the new paradigm should to be fully understood!.

[Dingo]

Flerc

Dr. Hilali Nordeen - Fellow Of The Royal College Of Surgery
On the MAGEC system
"I think it's one of the biggest advances in the treatment of spinal deformity."

Dr. Behrooz Akbarnia - Past President Scoliosis Research Society
"Ellipse has developed a truly remarkable technology that will dramatically advance the treatment of spinal deformity and significantly improve the otherwise traumatic experience these children currently endure."

MAGEC and technologies that internally brace and correct spinal deformity are the future. MAGEC not only treats scoliosis but it gives scientists another tool they can use to learn about the nature of spinal deformity.

I can assure you that the scientists involved in this project have learned many new things about Scoliosis.

[flerc]

Dingo I really hope they’ll not stop and reachs a full understanding and also try to help adults. With enough knowledge, surely some kind of solution they might imagine at least for avoid progression in big curves.

[rohrer01]

Fer, medicine is not like physics. It is much more complex.

But... Medicine has a LOT of physics incorporated into it. That's why doctors are required to take physics.

[rohrer01]

Yes but we have no idea what is involved in a "posterior release." Maybe no ligaments are involved. Maybe they released a bunch of other stuff. Who knows.

There's not a "bunch of stuff" back there to release. You have muscles, tendons, nerves, blood vessels, bones, and ligaments as far as I know, unless I missed something really big in my anatomy classes. I doubt that they would cut the tendons as they hold muscles to bone and the muscle would be useless after that.

[Pooka1]

But... Medicine has a LOT of physics incorporated into it. That's why doctors are required to take physics.

That's a good "but," rohrer. Point taken. :-)

Reminds me that all of bio is chem and all of chem is physics and all of physics is math and I usually "conveniently" forget the last part that all of math is philosophy. :-)

I think we can possibly break the math-philosophy dependence by observing that there are no real "why" questions as philosophy might provide but instead only "how" questions that science can provide. Not sure about that though.

[Pooka1]

There's not a "bunch of stuff" back there to release. You have muscles, tendons, nerves, blood vessels, bones, and ligaments as far as I know, unless I missed something really big in my anatomy classes. I doubt that they would cut the tendons as they hold muscles to bone and the muscle would be useless after that.

Okay fine. I have not taken a human anatomy or physiology class per se. I defer.

[rohrer01]

That's a good "but," rohrer. Point taken. :-)

Reminds me that all of bio is chem and all of chem is physics and all of physics is math and I usually "conveniently" forget the last part that all of math is philosophy. :-)

I think we can possibly break the math-philosophy dependence by observing that there are no real "why" questions as philosophy might provide but instead only "how" questions that science can provide. Not sure about that though.

Hey now, don't you be dissin my math and calling it philosophy. It's PURE UNADULTERATED LOGIC! lol You can prove everything, just about... except some of the physics mumbo jumbo that really gets far fetched and mostly unuseable in the real world. hee hee