The Effects of MS


MS has some advantages in comparison to other diseases. For those patients affected by MS:

  • The disease is not immediately critical in most cases.
  • The MS caused disturbances are often – at least partially – reversible.
  • Most MS symptoms can be efficiently self-recognized by the affected patients without special instruments and more often than not, in more detail than the doctors.

For doctors and therapists:

  • Basic source of income – patients will always come again at regular intervals
  • No nasty surprises or any other spectacular thing happens during the general run of treatment. On the other hand the disease does continue with varied symptoms which cannot be foreseen, thus it does not get too boring.
  • Not much danger of giving the wrong treatment. The treatment options are quite clear at the moment.

For the pharmaceutical industry:

  • Colossal business turnover with presumably relevantly high profits for interferons. Those responsible have probably got blisters on their fingers from counting money. From the economic point of view, interferon is a brilliant success. Each consumer ensures an annual turnover of approximately 15.000 Euro. As the progress of MS is only slowed down but not cured by this medicine, most patients will be for a long time.

As one can see, MS has many positive aspects, although there is a certain amount of discomfort for those directly concerned. Who wonders why, in a situation such as this, that no solutions have been found to cure this illness. Research seems to be done mainly on a microbiological level concerning the primary inflammation. Perhaps, on this level, there is the possibility of finding something similarly lucrative to the interferons that are momentarily in use. This seems to be a rather complicated way of trying to find the cause of MS. The rather meagre results that have been attained, confirm this impression. Other attempts to find solutions for MS hardly find any interest. There are for example diverse epidemiological studies concerning MS, that open many other points of view. The Canadian geologist Dr. Ashton F. Embry (his son has MS) collected these studies and tried to come to conclusions of how to treat MS. His aim was to identify the cause of MS and thus to improve or even cure the disease. His results should perhaps be more consequently followed up. It is difficult to avoid the impression that only MS-patients have a real interest in curing their disease. How can it otherwise be possible, that such simple thoughts have not been followed up by professional research projects?