6 pensieri su “BBC Inside out – CCSVI – part 2 of 2”
So, the BBC are actively fueling false alarm in British patients. It seems clear that this program has been recruited by powerful interests to interfere with CCSVI. To me, it’s a lame attempt, all that fake innuendo and bogus drama in the host’s voice. When she “confronts” Dr. Gilhooley, she looks like a joke, a paradoy of herself. The BBC is acting almost criminally. This kind of smear piece must mean we CCSVI’ers are winning.
the journalist faking an ms patient is in fact a pfizer agent and those neurologist retards who just got outsmarted by papa paolo are just denying it they got big pharma behind them at 30k a year medication per patient they ‘ll soon lose billions in revenue the bbc is not only irresponsible it is sadistic!if the world had listened to dr schelling in the 80′s this procedure would of been the standard treatment for ms today and millions of lives would of been saved worldwide! f..k the a.i theory!
I understand the naysayers need to have their stance ‘out there’ as well as the ccsvi proponents, but I feel the way in which this was done is an outrage. As QuickQuix said, this is an out and out smear piece. I see this as “fear” !! Again, agreed, ccsvi community is winning!
who would ever listen to Mr Rose anyway? He is an ignoramus and a truly nasty piece of work.
Wow, what a terrible one-sided non-factual piece of garbage. Do some real research BBC. Talk to the doctors and specialists involved. Talk to the people doing the trials in the US. Talk to the patients. Talk to the people that have MS and have or are getting treated. You just dropped down the journalistic drain.
Everyone should file complaints to the BBC….complete garbage.
BRAVO Dr. G. The nay sayers need to butt out. This is a vascular issue. I do not care if MS is or is not involved. My veins need attention from a Vascular specialist. There has been NOTHING even close to help MS as CCSVI has. This reporter demonstrates poor journalism. Are there no ethics, impartiality, research and sources not checked any more? DISGUSTING.
So, the BBC are actively fueling false alarm in British patients. It seems clear that this program has been recruited by powerful interests to interfere with CCSVI. To me, it’s a lame attempt, all that fake innuendo and bogus drama in the host’s voice. When she “confronts” Dr. Gilhooley, she looks like a joke, a paradoy of herself. The BBC is acting almost criminally. This kind of smear piece must mean we CCSVI’ers are winning.
the journalist faking an ms patient is in fact a pfizer agent and those neurologist retards who just got outsmarted by papa paolo are just denying it they got big pharma behind them at 30k a year medication per patient they ‘ll soon lose billions in revenue the bbc is not only irresponsible it is sadistic!if the world had listened to dr schelling in the 80′s this procedure would of been the standard treatment for ms today and millions of lives would of been saved worldwide! f..k the a.i theory!
I understand the naysayers need to have their stance ‘out there’ as well as the ccsvi proponents, but I feel the way in which this was done is an outrage. As QuickQuix said, this is an out and out smear piece. I see this as “fear” !! Again, agreed, ccsvi community is winning!
who would ever listen to Mr Rose anyway? He is an ignoramus and a truly nasty piece of work.
Wow, what a terrible one-sided non-factual piece of garbage. Do some real research BBC. Talk to the doctors and specialists involved. Talk to the people doing the trials in the US. Talk to the patients. Talk to the people that have MS and have or are getting treated. You just dropped down the journalistic drain.
Everyone should file complaints to the BBC….complete garbage.
BRAVO Dr. G. The nay sayers need to butt out. This is a vascular issue. I do not care if MS is or is not involved. My veins need attention from a Vascular specialist. There has been NOTHING even close to help MS as CCSVI has. This reporter demonstrates poor journalism. Are there no ethics, impartiality, research and sources not checked any more? DISGUSTING.