 |
 |
In my opinion tests for "early detection" of Parkinson's are a waste of time and money. Is this where the money for Parkinson's "research" is going? Robin Ruth Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 21, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Kathleen Cochran <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > In every article I've ever seen about biomarkers, there's text like this > (from the article Ray posted): > > "So if you knew earlier that this was happening you might be able to do > something about it, particularly in the future when maybe better treatments > might become available." > > Seems to me the helpfulness of biomarkers is pretty seriously limited by > the absence of treatments that will slow or reverse disease progression. > Under present conditions, biomarkers might be seen as stealing a few years > of blissful ignorance, when you don't yet know you have this disease. > > Or insurance companies might find a better way to deny coverage, or > potential employers might choose not to hire someone known to be headed for > PD. > > If someone can make a case for the value to patients of biomarkers without > better treatment, I would love to hear it. > > Kathleen > > > > > >> On 20 April 2016 at 22:00, Rayilyn Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2016/s4446582.htm >> >> Ray >> Rayilyn Brown >> Past Director AZNPF >> Arizona Chapter National Parkinson Foundation >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto: >> [log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn