Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dystonia is the historical/current cause?

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

  • #31
    Research is only a (significant) step of Problem Solving. Some researches as those about the historical (and probably one of the currents) cause of the scoliosis, or discs regeneration could be useful or not in a so complex multi causal (without any doubt) problem as scoliosis after growth (at least in great curves) is.
    I always think that if I’d have enough money I’ll lead a Project of scientists, some of the best osteopaths, chiros, physios, western and eastern doctors.. and in a short time the outcome of that Project would be a great solution to the scoliosis of my daughter and for so many people too. In fact, I’ll only finance it. Anyone participating in this thread could lead it much better than me.
    But we could think we are participating in some kind of virtual Project, why not? What kind of scope could it has? Who knows?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by flerc View Post
      Research is only a (significant) step of Problem Solving. Some researches as those about the historical (and probably one of the currents) cause of the scoliosis, or discs regeneration could be useful or not in a so complex multi causal (without any doubt) problem as scoliosis after growth (at least in great curves) is.
      I always think that if I’d have enough money I’ll lead a Project of scientists, some of the best osteopaths, chiros, physios, western and eastern doctors.. and in a short time the outcome of that Project would be a great solution to the scoliosis of my daughter and for so many people too. In fact, I’ll only finance it. Anyone participating in this thread could lead it much better than me.
      But we could think we are participating in some kind of virtual Project, why not? What kind of scope could it has? Who knows?
      That would cost a LOT of money! But the thought is very nice!
      Be happy!
      We don't know what tomorrow brings,
      but we are alive today!

      Comment


      • #33
        I want to contact some millionaire affected by scoliosis. Could be someone in the world?

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by flerc View Post
          I always think that if I’d have enough money I’ll lead a Project of scientists, some of the best osteopaths, chiros, physios, western and eastern doctors..
          Well if you are going to include osteopath, chiros, physios, and eastern doctors, you will have to include alchemists, flat-earthers, and tarot card readers.

          In general, even doctors/surgeons do not get any significant training to do RESEARCH unless they have a MD/PhD combined degree. If they did then there would be no need to offer an MD/PhD. Q.E.D.

          The people who will solve scoliosis are medical researchers in the fields of molecular biology, genetics, endocrinology, metabolic physiology, neurology, neurochemistry, etc.

          The surgeons cannot solve scoliosis... they are simply the only people qualified to treat it until it is solved.
          Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

          No island of sanity.

          Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
          Answer: Medicine


          "We are all African."

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by skevimc View Post
            I know English is not your primary language so if something is not clear I can try to explain it differently. Are you using google translate? http://translate.google.com/#
            Thanks, in fact google translator confused me more, I use dictionaries on line. English is still difficult for me to write or read. Many times I realized about mistakes, (as in the title of that thread), and I always doubt if it could be comprehended what I wanted to say. Please let me know when something is not clear.
            I think I understand what you say, but sorely I could not be sure at all. If I say something without any sense could be for that reason (or for other more serious HA).

            Without muscles to keep the spine straight, the body would have to rely on being perfectly balanced, and even then it would still slouch quite a bit. If you move, then everything collapses.
            I think if neck could not move neither to the front nor to sides, there is no way for a normal body sit down in a bench over the wall to collapse, is not possible that a lateral curve appears. I made some proofs with myself. I practiced some kind of Yoga and believe me I can really relax my body and I’m sure I’m not activating any muscle. GPR people says about some gravity or statics muscles, we not active in a voluntary way. I think that if those muscles not allowed the body to collapse, they should to be so involuntary and imperceptibles as smooth muscles. They say too that the muscles length is involved in that and the muscles in concave side are shortened. But if it’s true, how could be my daughter straight her column?
            This is displayed in polio scoliosis and muscular dystrophies (among other musculoskeletal diseases). Those conditions cause horribly twisted and curved spines. If the vertebral bodies and discs were 'much more' important than muscles, this wouldn't happen.
            ABR people says that is not caused for striated muscles in fact, but I want to ask and know your opinion for them in other thread soon, for not loose the focus. Anyway something caused it during growth. But now, muscles don’t seems for me to allow the spine to be upright (in the sense we were talking) or to prevent it to be more curve in a frontal plane.
            I must to understand that concepts, because the only one treatment my daughter is following is GPR and it is mainly focused in striated (mainly statics) muscles (in fact fascias, connective tissues and other things too) so I could know if she is needing other kind of therapy too, focused in other thing.
            I should to know if striated muscles diseases as dystonia are a current cause or only an historical one, and how important could it be now.
            Surely nobody could be absolutely sure of those things, but I’ll appreciate your opinion very much. I'll go over GPR more in depht soon. Thanks for all!

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Pooka1 View Post
              Well if you are going to include osteopath, chiros, physios, and eastern doctors, you will have to include alchemists, flat-earthers, and tarot card readers.
              Ida Rolfer did not think as you. She had a Doctored in Biochimestry and she studied osteopathy, chiropractic, yoga, Tai chi, Homeopathy and some other disciplines and finally, with all that great knowledge she created Rolfing. Do you think that discipline is comparable with Tarot or alchemy?
              The people who will solve scoliosis are medical researchers in the fields of molecular biology, genetics, endocrinology, metabolic physiology, neurology, neurochemistry, etc.
              I agree that knowledge is extremely necessary but I'm not sure if it'll be enough. Anyway I continue trying to contact with that medical researches, without much success in fact. Sorely they are not trying to solve the problem of people with scoliosis.
              The surgeons cannot solve scoliosis... they are simply the only people qualified to treat it until it is solved.
              Maybe you are wright and surgery would be the only resource today, but I'm not sure of that, so I'll continue trying with something conservative while I can.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by flerc View Post
                Ida Rolfer did not think as you. She had a Doctored in Biochemistry and she studied osteopathy, chiropractic, yoga, Tai chi, Homeopathy and some other disciplines and finally, with all that great knowledge she created Rolfing. Do you think that discipline is comparable with Tarot or alchemy?
                I can beat that!

                Curt Wise has PhD in geology (paleontology) from Harvard University and his adviser was none other than Stephen Jay Gould. Curt Wise does NOT accept the fact of evolution.

                I'm sorry but my example beats ALL other examples as it must. This is arguably the gold standard for people getting legitimate doctorates degrees from accredited universities and then ignoring what they learned.

                The point is that anyone who gets a degree can then ignore the scientific method after they get it. I doubt she used any biochemistry knowledge or any science at all to create rolfing but I don't know that.

                What claims does rolfing make and how many have they proven? I have no idea.
                Last edited by Pooka1; 05-09-2010, 07:41 PM. Reason: trying to avoid rioting
                Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

                No island of sanity.

                Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
                Answer: Medicine


                "We are all African."

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Dingo View Post
                  I'm not sure if this is necessarily true but looked at backwards could it be said that Parkinson's disease is higher among Scoliosis patients?

                  Wasn't there a guy on here about a month ago who said he was just diagnosed with Parkinson's? I think he was a poster from scoliosis-support.
                  Not necessarily. In logic (math logic which applies to other logic as well) just because something goes one way does not mean it goes the other. There would have to be a study of the relationship of scoliosis ---> parkinson's. If there IS a relationship of parkinson's ---> scoliosis the above isn't necessarily true and would have to be proven independently.
                  Be happy!
                  We don't know what tomorrow brings,
                  but we are alive today!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by rohrer01 View Post
                    Not necessarily. In logic (math logic which applies to other logic as well) just because something goes one way does not mean it goes the other. There would have to be a study of the relationship of scoliosis ---> parkinson's. If there IS a relationship of parkinson's ---> scoliosis the above isn't necessarily true and would have to be proven independently.
                    This would be like stating: 30-90% of people who eat green apples vomit. Therefore, of all the people that vomit, 30-90% must have eaten green apples.

                    Do you see how you can not turn things around? It just doesn't work and it isn't true unless you can prove it's true.

                    It is the same way with diseases that may be linked one way, but certainly not the other. I wouldn't suggest that people with scoliosis are more susceptible to Parkinson's unless there is a better reason than people with Parkinson's tend to get scoliosis.
                    Be happy!
                    We don't know what tomorrow brings,
                    but we are alive today!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Dingo thinks there MAY have been one person who mentioned that he had Parkinsons, and that's apparently enough to conclude that there's a link between the two.
                      Never argue with an idiot. They always drag you down to their level, and then they beat you with experience. --Twain
                      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Surgery 2/10/93 A/P fusion T4-L3
                      Surgery 1/20/11 A/P fusion L2-sacrum w/pelvic fixation

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Pooka1 View Post
                        I can beat that!

                        Curt Wise has PhD in geology (paleontology) from Harvard University and his adviser was none other than Stephen Jay Gould. Curt Wise is a young earth creationist.

                        I'm sorry but my example beats ALL other examples as it must. This is arguably the gold standard for people getting legitimate doctorates degrees from accredited universities and then ignoring what they learned.

                        The point is that anyone who gets a degree can then ignore the scientific method after they get it. I doubt she used any biochemistry knowledge or any science at all to create rolfing but I don't know that.

                        What claims does rolfing make and how many have they proven? I have no idea.
                        I think that without that great conceptual background reached in the University, she could never arrived to something as Rolfing. Of course you could think she turned mystic, believing in ancient and exoteric cultures, creating something without any value.
                        I know a doctor with a great scoliosis, that has a big and illustrated book of Rolfing. That is enough for me to think is different as Tarot or séance..

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          In defense of flerc's suggestion of rolfing, they do fascia release in PT. Although, I can't say that I know much about rolfing, I just did a quick search to see what it was about, and that seems to be what she was trying to accomplish. Although comparing ice cubes to stiff fascia is kind of a hard comparison in my mind. Water stiffens because of temperature. I don't know what her theory was as to why she thinks the fascia hardens. My guess would be adhesions (which I know I have mentioned before on a different thread)?
                          Be happy!
                          We don't know what tomorrow brings,
                          but we are alive today!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by rohrer01 View Post
                            Not necessarily. In logic (math logic which applies to other logic as well) just because something goes one way does not mean it goes the other. There would have to be a study of the relationship of scoliosis ---> parkinson's. If there IS a relationship of parkinson's ---> scoliosis the above isn't necessarily true and would have to be proven independently.
                            Exactly.

                            Dingo is engaging in a type of "if-then" fallacy.

                            It is called converting a conditional.

                            If A then B. Therefore if B then A.

                            There is a long list of logical fallacies. The mind is not reliable.
                            Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

                            No island of sanity.

                            Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
                            Answer: Medicine


                            "We are all African."

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Pooka1 View Post
                              Exactly.

                              Dingo is engaging in a type of "if-then" fallacy.

                              It is called converting a conditional.

                              If A then B. Therefore if B then A.

                              There is a long list of logical fallacies. The mind is not reliable.
                              Believe me, I know. I had to endure a semester of math logic to get my math minor. The professor, if that's what you can call her, was terrible. But the subject matter was great. When you can learn to "prove" things logically, you understand the world around you much better. It works in language as well as mathematics. Something we all need to watch out for, false reasoning can get us really confused.
                              Be happy!
                              We don't know what tomorrow brings,
                              but we are alive today!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by rohrer01 View Post

                                A thought posted by Scevimc about Schroth. I know you weren't promoting this, as you stated. But even though postural appearance is a complaint among many with scoliosis, my opinion is that postural training, such as I did as a child can be dangerous in scoliosis patients. ... Other's don't see them and that's only because I am "balanced" and it is easier to hide with clothing. But I don't think the overall effect is very good. So for those of you out there reading this, please be careful. Looking balanced isn't everything.
                                Agree completely. Balance doesn't do a lot of good if your curve is progressing. There was one article I remember reading from H. Weiss and there was an adult patient whose curve did not improve after in patient Schroth therapy (it might have even progressed a bit). At any rate, they sort of claimed a successful treatment because her trunk symmetry improved and they showed two pictures (before and after) and her posture did look better. But she has a pretty good sized curve. It's a good thought that external trunk symmetry might hide what's really happening inside.

                                Originally posted by Pooka1 View Post

                                But I think we have to remember that researchers think about this stuff all the time. What is novel and clever to us is very likely reinventing the wheel or already disproven to them. Of course we can't say that 100% of the time but we can be confident it is happening virtually all the time.

                                There is a reason why researchers are working on what they are working on and a reason why they aren't working on other things at this time. And that reason isn't likely to be that they simply haven't thought about it. This is what it means to have an expertise in something.

                                ETA: It seems that for every thing that "our" muscle physiologist find fascinating, he has posted several more posts "edifying" folks on various topics. By that's just my impression and he can speak for himself.
                                This is something that amazes with some researchers and what can be so neat about being deep in a particular field. At conferences some other scientists will ask some off the wall question and the really good ones have an answer for it or can at least attempt a good guess. It just shows that idea of being so immersed in something that you have thought about it from so many angles.

                                That being said, I think more researchers could/would benefit from coming on to these boards and either engaging in discussion or at least snooping around. While researchers can be very passionate about their work and think about it A LOT, we can, and do, leave it behind. Weekends, vacations, changing projects etc... Patients and families don't have that luxury. Consequently many of you are driven by something much more visceral. Having been a patient myself (not scoliosis) I understand the vigor and almost endless quest for understanding and answers. I can only imagine the zeal I would have if it were for my daughter. I have gained a lot by engaging on here. Some things I don't follow or believe. Other things are concepts I've either never really followed (like Marfan's) or thought much about (like genetics).

                                I think a good scientist will always be skeptical but will also remain open to a new idea. Perhaps the classification would be "optimistically skeptical'. But not so optimistic that we follow every rabbit into it's hole and not so skeptical we don't follow any rabbits.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X