Annals of Neurology - Article and Response

Here is a link to an article in the Annals of Neurology journal that basically advises MS patients to wait (for five to ten years) to be treated or even TESTED for CCSVI:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123299953/PDFSTART?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

In rebuttal, Ashton Embry argues that the authors of the AN article were premature (it came out before the BNAC results were published), wrong and very likely in conflict of interest (given the relationships the senior authors have with drug companies): http://www.direct-ms.org/magazines/Embry%20Open%20Letter%20to%20Khan%20et%20al%20regarding%20CCSVI.pdf

My own take on it is this: What kind of doctors/researchers would dissuade people from even being tested for what might be an initial cause and contributor to the progression of a horrible, debilitating disease? Nobody yet knows how much permanent damage can be reduced if CCSVI is detected and treated - rate of progression is extremely individual - but in most cases there is significant deterioration in that amount of time. In five years, MS can result in a huge reduction in the quality of life and irreparable damage to the brain and nerves even if you are able to take drugs to slow the progression - and these drugs themselves carry significant risks of side-effects, such as cancer and death!

Oh well, at least they weren't as bad as that jerk Freedman who is still saying that CCSVI and the liberation treatment are just a hoax, despite the already huge but still growing evidence to the contrary!