Clear data pub count down

[Pooka1]

Oh no actually I think this is the same one that was completed in February 2010.

[Pooka1]

Maybe one in the chute???

There was mention of a 140 patient study from Clear that is being readied for submission to some chiro journal per Josh Woggon. But he anticipated it would get picked apart. Hmmm. And we can presume the other Clear chiros have read it and at least one still admits there is no evidence Clear works. Moreover, he doesn't want Clear to be judged by their results, only the "merits" of the approach. I don't see how that helps in this case, though.

[Pooka1]

Stop holding our collective breath?

Coming up on 8 months and I think we might stop waiting... a Clear chiro has recently admitted there is no evidence their approach works.

Further, he claims approaches should be judged just on their perceived merit as opposed to evidence. I guess by that he means like the swimsuit competition in beauty pageants as opposed to the talent portion.

I might still update this thread depending on how the feeling strikes me. But I think the point of waiting for a pub on evidence that Clear is effective is not going to pan out.

[Pooka1]

awww.....Sharon...some 5 months later and you guys still havent chosen a Pub to go drinking in...

it's summer...perfect time for a "pub crawl"!!

i have no patience right now for any other kind of "pub"..havent since i got my last graduate degree!

Excellent points.

And here we are ANOTHER day later and still no Clear pub that was promised.

[jrnyc]

awww.....Sharon...some 5 months later and you guys still havent chosen a Pub to go drinking in...

it's summer...perfect time for a "pub crawl"!!

i have no patience right now for any other kind of "pub"..havent since i got my last graduate degree!

[hdugger]

They didn't even use the same vertebrae, which in and of itself invalidates the whole thing.

Not a comment on the paper, but our orthopedic surgeon doesn't necessarily use the same vertebrae from visit to visit. I think that's considered normal procedure in this field - they're looking for the curve, not measuring between specific vertebrae.

[Pooka1]

You are kidding right? That paper wouldn't even be allowed as evidence in a college paper, let alone peer reviewed! They didn't even use the same vertebrae, which in and of itself invalidates the whole thing. I do agree with them NOT to break things free by adjusting the "high side of the rainbow". This is what they TEACH chiros to do. This is exactly what my chiro did, and I progressed.

I did say it was an unpublished study. It goes without saying it is also unpublishable in the peer-reviewed journals. It is Exhibit "A" in why chiros aren't qualified to treat people.

[rohrer01]

Are there any peer-reviewed Clear papers? I can't find any.

Here's an unpublished study frm Clear...

http://www.clear-institute.org/Porta...Correction.pdf

You are kidding right? That paper wouldn't even be allowed as evidence in a college paper, let alone peer reviewed! They didn't even use the same vertebrae, which in and of itself invalidates the whole thing. I do agree with them NOT to break things free by adjusting the "high side of the rainbow". This is what they TEACH chiros to do. This is exactly what my chiro did, and I progressed.

[Pooka1]

Still no Clear pub

Still no clear pubs and none seemingly contemplated.

Please refer to initial post in this thread.

I will be updating this thread every 6 months.

[hdugger]

I think people just have different natures. I have an experimental nature, so I'm always willing to run an experiment of one. I try not to go *against* doctor orders, but I also do a fair amount of reading to figure out if I can do something to augment whatever treatment I'm given (assuming the treatment itself isn't immediately curative.)

I like science, but I know there's only so much money and time to go around, and it could take a very long time for science to get to my particular concerns.

[Pooka1]

I suspect some of that has to do with parents' feeling that they should be doing *something* instead of just waiting. Perhaps if they had something else they thought was effective for those smaller curves, they would be willing to wait to start bracing.

I don't know about other folks but I want the surgeon to pick the treatment based on evidence. This is his field, not mine and I'm paying him (or the insurance company is). I don't think my feelings enter into the science of it. And when he departs from evidence, I want to know about it and have some idea how large the departure is. I have exactly ZERO mental need to treat my kid other than what the surgeon says is worth a try, especially when it comes to something as difficult as bracing. But that's just the kind of hairpin I am.

[hdugger]

I suspect some of that has to do with parents' feeling that they should be doing *something* instead of just waiting. Perhaps if they had something else they thought was effective for those smaller curves, they would be willing to wait to start bracing.

[Pooka1]

Given that protocol, only the cost of exercise for patients between 15 and 35 degrees would be added to the current protocol.

When you consider the BRAIST researchers appeared to have been browbeaten into lowering the bracing limit from 25* to 20*, I bet there are many parents who will not consider waiting until 35*. Just my impression.

[hdugger]

Nope. I'm saying that there are 200,000 new cases of scoliosis each year where the curves fall outside of the treatment protocol. That is, their curves are too small to warrant treatment.

I posted the SEAS protocol, and that's the one I would (personally) recommend. Their protocol has exercise from 15 to 35, and bracing after that. That's an alternative course, but one where the bracing falls within the standard protocol.

Given that protocol, only the cost of exercise for patients between 15 and 35 degrees would be added to the current protocol. I think Kevin's post breaks down those costs very well.

All of this, of course, is for AIS only. The risk of progression for JIS is so elevated that you might have to shift the treatment window much earlier in order to keep those kids from progressing.

[Pooka1]

Okay that was pretty interesting. But isn't peak height velocity as determined by sequential height measurements going to underestimate the velocity in the case of a progressive curve? Maybe it isn't significant enough such that the phase is missed using this approach, I don't know.