Quote: Originally Posted by JLM
I'll take the risk of butting in here and make a comment about something I really know nothing about. I'm just wondering if perhaps Canada's standards for drug qualifications aren't higher than Italy's. Is it possible that while Italy is curing a few patients it's also killing a few? This may be an area where S.J.'s statistics might come in handy.
I don't trust his statistics. He has too much tendency to add opinion and he hardly posts anything to support his claims.
If anything I think Canada is overly cautious with relatively extreme ailments. If someone has something that doesn't seriously affect their health and some new drug comes into the picture that would fix the problem, fine, be overly cautious. But if something is affecting asomeone in a severe way and something comes along that might cure them, Canada seems to putter around with the idea of introducing the stuff for decades before letting it loose. How long after radiation treatments for certain cancers came out before Canuckville decided it might work on Canadians? It's like those bureaucrats thing Canadians and Americans are different species or something. If this procedure (and its not drug therapy) solves MS in some cases I think it should be used and if it has a side effect and the side effect is decidely less than the MS, what's the big deal. Especially after Canada allows over-the-counter drugs to be sold here where the cure for a sniffle has a side-effect list a foot long. Scuse me but I'll suffer with the sniffle and save myself the tummy cramps, diarrhea, nausea, drowsiness, dizziness, etc.