Data From Multiple Sclerosis Patients
4-7-00
Re: ABC™ Treatment
I received my first treatment 3-6-00 at the North City
Chiropractic Health Clinic from Dr.Cheri Markos. Since that
date I have gone twice each week. I have been declining with
multiple sclerosis and all the various symptoms since 1988.
I have tried many treatments for relief and have been on Avonex
since 1996. 1 have not seen any significant results or have
had any real relief. Main stream doctors and naturopaths have
no solutions.
My symptoms and disabilities have become more of a challenge
in the past 5 years. I now know I have crossed over to secondary
progressive.
After the very first treatment from Dr. Markos the results
were amazing. There was no waiting period to see if there
would be any results. It was immediate. Ever since that initial
visit I notice more and more of my body coining back to me.
My balance, strength, energy and mobility, to name just a
few, have improved dramatically. I can now bend over and pick
up things with bent legs without falling, I feel so much stronger
and stable. I can look around without experiencing significant
vertigo, a real bonus!!!!!!!
I could really go on and on. The bottom line is that the
ABC™ treatment provided by Dr. Markos works. It has worked
for everyone that has received the treatment. I have referred
a couple of people who also have seen immediate and dramatic
results. Even those patients who have a lot more disability
than myself
I would like to recommend that anyone who has MS go for
treatment from Dr. Markos. The results are staggering!! !
! I !!! I wish I could go on national news and let the whole
country know.
Sincerely,
Katherine Bursert
Here are the results of patients diagnosed with Multiple
Sclerosis. For more data on the reason this works so well
with MS and other do-called "neurological disease"
cases please see the article, Neurological Diseases or Mechanical
Pathology (which can be addressed and improved).
Advanced BioStructural Therapy™ February 23, 2000
My name is Larry Conaway, I was DX with MS in August 1996,
at the age if 50. I was DX with primary progressive, and at
this time the VA put on a bunch of meds. Dr. Markos has been
treating me off and on for the last two years. About six months
ago I lost the ability to raise my left leg that Dr. Markos
was able to keep working it for one and half years.
Dr. Markos learned the Advanced BioStructural Therapy™
now called Advanced BioStructural Correction™) and then
asked me if I wanted to try this new procedure. I am always
ready to try anything new that would help people with MS.
Then I started the ABC™ with DR. Markos on February 16,
20000.
Since then I have had three appointments, on the 18th,
21st, and the 24th .
The first appointment was like a miracle to me. After
my very first session I could stand up straight and walk more
stable, bend over from the waist and pick up objects off the
floor and stand back up again, walk down stairs with less
worry of my left knee giving out, and no back pain, which
I have had for the last three years. I have only noticed a
moderate improvement while walking up the stairs.
I noticed that when I walk, that my left leg does not
hyperextend backwards. This has relieved the pain that I have
been getting around my patella. The VA was about to make me
a knee brace for that knee and now I don't think that I will
need it.
When I walk forward, my left leg will bend forward at
the knee and it has not done that for about two years. I can
swing my left leg forward and now when I walk that makes it
easier to walk smoothly. I can also turn around while standing
up without having to hold onto a wall or other balance object
and this is at a fast rate of turning.
My left foot has been a floppy foot since I was DX with
MS back in August of 1996, and now I can hold it up as I walk
and that keeps me from having to drag it along, and that keeps
me from tripping over it also.
I noticed that I can now stand on either leg while resting
the other one. My legs do not get fatigued as fast as before
the procedure. I have been able to stand on my legs for a
longer time with out having to sit down.
I find that it is a lot easier to get in and out of the
shower. I can spend more time in the shower without my legs
getting tired. I can bend over and get the soap with out worrying
about falling down.
I am finding it easier to get dressed and undressed, and
putting on my shoes is a snap now.
Working in the kitchen making dinner or just getting my
coffee is easier now also. I think that this is a great benefit
to be able to do what I need to do in the kitchen.
I now spend less time in my wheel chair and more time
on my feet.
I have noticed that before my appointment on the 24th,
that my head and neck were further forward and that my body
has started to slump forward. After the treatment, I noticed
that I was no longer slumped forward and my shoulders were
back. I did notice that my left hip seemed to be lower than
it was after the first treatment. I am now back at the point
of the first appointment and the above descriptions.
February 26th, 2000: I noticed that I was leaning to the
left and a little slumped forward since the last adjustment
and Dr. Markos adjusted it back so that I was standing up
straight again. At this appointment, we started ABC™
procedure on my friend Mark Wheat. I helped DR. Markos with
this by being the camera man. At first I found it hard to
stand and hold the camera for a long period of time and hold
it steady too. Then after do this for a few minutes I was
able to settle down and even hold the camera steadier. This
was hard for me while I was standing with just one eye open
and the other eye in the view finder. It took a couple of
minutes and then my body got trained, as far as holding the
camera steady and moving with one eye shut, to filming the
procedure. I could stand and move with the camera and hold
it fairly steady at this point.
I also stopped taking Baclofen and now I am waiting to
see if I need to keep taking it or not.
Another
Catherine Sykes Seattle, WA
Advanced BioStructural Correction™ With Dr. Markos
began March 1 5. 2000.
The following physical capabilities began to occur after
treatment.
I use a walker or am assisted by someone in public because
my balance is poor and my left leg is weak, when at home I
use a cane or wall walk.
3/15/00
I am able to breathe deeply for the first time in years. My
body feels less stiff arid more open. I am able to make the
transition from barefoot to AFO & arch supports much easier.
3/1 7
I am sleeping 10 hrs at night w/ 1 hr naps.
3/18
I am able to stand straight and up right with my shoulders
back, I am no longer hunched over. The left leg has an AFO
but I have noticed it collapsing on me.
3/20
I can stand up straight without holding on to anything or
using my arms for balance, I can flail them about w/o being
thrown off balance.
3/21
My feet, calves and arches ache and I noticed I am sleeping
10 hrs w/ naps.
3/22
I feel stiff, very emotional & crying all day.
3/23
I was in my barefoot and bent down to pick up a bowl off the
floor w/o planning how I was going to manage this endeavor.
It just happened! I have noticed the warmth returning to my
feet and hands. I can walk better w/o my AFO and support.
3/24
My walking flows and is less choppy. I am able to stand up
straight with my hands clasped in front to my chest or abdomen.
I do not have to hold on to anything or use my arms for balance.
3/27
My hands and feet are warm / I had a massage and feel so much
better.
4/3
I can feel the arches in my feet, as though they are returning
to me.
4/4
My dog(70 Ibs) began laying on my legs, I could feel exactly
where he was and feel his paws as he raced over my shins and
jumped off the bed. Before I would just feel a weighted mass
at my legs and was unable to distinguish it, this all occurred
w/o looking at what was happening to my legs.
My left leg is weaker than the right but I have noticed
that I am able to bare weight equally on both legs w/o favoring
to the left or having it collapse on me. I am able to take
5 steps w/o using my cane or wall walking, this all occurred
in my barefoot. (I hyper extended my left leg )
4/6
My AFO and supports were bothering me so I took them out,
I barely noticed they weren’t in when my left foot did
turn out, I was tired and needed to rest. I tried this for
only 4 hrs today.
Dr. Jesse Jutkowitz
Member |
What everyone seems to miss, because they did not post it, was my answer to
Dr. Rob Ward.
What he states is based on the preliminary data in ADVERSE MECHANICAL TENSION
ON THE CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM. Ward did not bother to get SKULL TRACTION AND
CERVICAL CORD INJURY which was published 11 years later (1989) and included a
further decade of research.
There, the further case studies are well documented and the further
conclusions are drawn. Rob Ward's comments were on incomplete researching of the
data.
He got very quiet when I posted the exact quotes from SKULL
TRACTION... |
GWDC
Member | not to defend JJ, but rather to further understanding...I
am glad that you posted the post you did. Perhaps it should
be included under Gary's post.
Do you really believe that the errector spinae transmit forces the way the
article's author suggests???
If so could you please provide me with EMG documentation of the same?
So it would appear that the critic uses unsubstantiated claims to slam a
fellow DC.
After reading both of David Butler's books, don't you feel that the neural
tension model is viable???
Would not a more mature statement be " an alternative explanation to neural
tension, might be the transmission of tension in the erector spinae muscles"?
Isn't this a case of the kettle calling the pot black?
What is Soto-Hall's maneuver?? Flexing the neck re-producing lower body
pain....by what?? Dural tension! The concept has been around for years.
In our rush to be right, do we fail to consider that we may not have all the
knowledge needed to understand the concept?
Neitche (sp?) said it best...there is no bird's eye view....everything is
looked at from one perspective...our own!!!
BTW1:I was particularly un-impressed by Dr. Wards lack of refs to back up his
OPINIONS
------------------
BTW2: DM you have read Butler's books...If my
reading of Butler is correct it seems to contradict Ward's assumptions of the
mechanisms of dural tension....see the "slump test" Butler's first book...It's
been a while am I
incorrect??? |
GWDC
Member | Just a follow-up to Rob Ward's opinions...
"However, the simple experiment that Dr. Jutkowitz proposes you perform will
in fact demonstrate to you that due to the overlapping nature of the erector
spinae, you will become aware of greater tension on the cervical musculature
with head flexion in a squatting posture.
>>>> It is doubtful that this phenomenon is related to spinal
cord stretching, >>>> which doesn't become apparent to most people
until you flex the entire spine, flex the hip, extend the knee, and possibly add
dorsiflexion of the ankle."
Is this correct???
1: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1997 Dec;26(6):310-7
The slump test: the effects of head and lower extremity position on
knee
extension.
Johnson EK, Chiarello CM
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Center, Englewood, NJ, USA.
Maitland's slump test is a widely used neural tissue tension test. During
slump testing, terminal knee extension is assessed for signs of restricted range
of motion (ROM), which may indicate impaired neural tissue mobility. A number of
refinements that modify hip and ankle position has been added to the basic slump
test procedure, but no research to date has measured the effects of ankle and
hip position on knee extension ROM during testing. The purpose of this study was
to examine the effect of neural tension-producing movements of the cervical
spine and lower extremity on knee extension ROM during the slump test.
Thirty-four males with no significant history of low back pain were
tested in the slump position with the cervical spine flexed and extended in each
of three lower extremity test positions: neutral hip rotation with the ankle in
a position of subject comfort (neutral), neutral hip rotation with ankle
dorsiflexion (ankle dorsiflexion), and medial hip rotation with ankle
dorsiflexion. >>>>>>
Results showed significant decreases in active knee extension ROM (F1,198 =
29.53, p < 0.0001) in the cervical flexion compared with the cervical
extension conditions.
Subjects also exhibited significant decreases in active knee extension
ROM (F2,198 = 56.76, p < 0.0001) as they were progressed from neutral to the
ankle dorsiflexion to the medial hip rotation with ankle dorsiflexion positions
of the lower extremity. The results of our study indicate that limitations in
terminal knee extension ROM may be considered a normal response to the inclusion
of cervical flexion, ankle dorsiflexion, or medial hip rotation in the slump
test in young, healthy, adult males. In addition, the presence of a cumulative
effect on knee extension ROM with the simultaneous application of these motions
is noted. These findings may assist clinicians when assessing knee extension ROM
during slump testing.
|
This is part of a discussion from a MD message board.
I am a 45 year old pediatrician who was given a diagnosis
of multiple sclerosis due to progressive neurologic signs
and symptoms. I wish to publicly thank my neurosurgical colleagues
who determined that the correct diagnosis was congenital and
acquired cervical spinal stenosis. Although clinically I had
classic "MS", my MRIs revealed no plaques. I underwent
a laminoplasty from C3 to C7 and have now fully recovered.
A bonus is that it also cured a lifelong history of severe
neurocardiogenic syncope with prolonged episodes of asystole
and resting bradycardia - the sympathetic tracts were also
compromised. My cardiologist was amazed at my recovery! He
no longer recommends a pacemaker. Perhaps there are many others
with such misdiagnoses.
=================================
Response -
MS without plaques on MRI? MS should be more than simply
cord problems--even transverse myelitis usually appears on
MRI. Did you have eye problems or other brain problems in
your "Classic MS"?
I have seen patients with both MS and cervical stenosis, but
if the only symptoms are related to the neck I wouldn't think
MS.
===================================
Response -
Did the LP show Oligoclonal Banding?
===================================
Response -
: Hail fellow! You have been so fortunate in having such
astute physicians investigating your problems. I assume that
a complete workup including all the necessary studies to r/o
MS and that other causes thus were investigated. Do not be
skeptical. You have been essentially cured and have made an
astonishing recovery. The proof is in the pudding. God Bless!
================================
(Supe again)...Now, I'm no great believer in Jesse's proprietary
technique, but maybe ol' Breig was onto something... I would
say that perhaps certain pathologies that irritate or put
tension on the spinal cord produce clinical presentations
that are clinically indistinguishable from classic MS.
More from the original discussion:
Supe,
did any of the MDs on the board jump all over this doc and
talk about how it's just an anecdotal story...and then suggest
that the recovery was merely placebo???
I didn't think so!!!
The big question is: can any manipulative procedure performed
by DC's have any effect on a stenotic canal? I say again:
an atomically stenotic canal?
Mirtzy
---------------
Dr. Mirtz,
perhaps this should go under scanners anecdotal evidence...
Patient getting left arm numbness down into fingers, burning
sensation into neck and face.
Worse at night.
Cardiologist wanted to do a catheterization. Your old
boy in the burgh does some neuro-othopedic tests and can reproduce
the patient symptoms...
I say MRI c spine...cardiologist says cath lab.
Before the patient could get the catheterization...she
gets the MRI...DC wins cervical stenosis...patient refused
cath....
long story short....chiropractic reduces cord compression
enough that the patient has not had S & S in several years
(I see her 2-3X per years as follow-up).
As for lumbar spinal stenosis....I've treated literally
100s...had 1 go onto surgery.
BTW: interesting that the surgeons (some) feel that cervical
spondylitic myelopathy results more from tension in the dentate
ligament on the cord than from compression from stenosis.....yikes
this supports JJ (Dr. Jutkowitz's) ideas!!!!
I'll get the ref soon.
------------------
1: J Spinal Disord 1991 Sep;4(3):286-95
Cervical laminectomy and dentate ligament section for
cervical spondylitic
myelopathy.
Benzel EC, Lancon J, Kesterson L, Hadden T
Division of Neurosurgery, University of New Mexico School
of Medicine,
Albuquerque 87131.
Seventy-five patients who underwent surgical treatment
for cervical spondylotic
myelopathy were evaluated with respect to the operative procedure
performed and
their outcome. Forty patients underwent a laminectomy plus
dentate ligament
section (DLS), 18 underwent laminectomy alone, and 17 underwent
an anterior
cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF). The patients were
evaluated
postoperatively for both stability and for neurologic outcome
using a
modification of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Assessment
Scale.
Functional improvement occurred in all but one patient in
the laminectomy plus
DLS group. The average improvement was 3.1 +/- 1.5 points
in this group; whereas
the average improvement in the laminectomy and the ACDF groups
was 2.7 +/- 2.0
and 3.0 +/- 2.0 points respectively. All of the patients who
improved
substantially (greater than or equal to 6 points) in the laminectomy
plus DLS
and the laminectomy alone groups had normal cervical spine
contours (lordosis).
The remainder had either a normal lordosis or no curve (no
kyphosis or
lordosis). All patients in the ACDF group had either a straight
spine or a
cervical kyphosis. These factors implicate spine curvature,
in addition to
choice of operation, as factors which are important in outcome
determination. No
problems with instability occurred in either the laminectomy
or the laminectomy
plus DLS group. Two patients incurred problems with stability
in the ACDF group.
Both required reoperation. In addition, four patients in this
group who
initially improved, subsequently deteriorated. Six patients
in the laminectomy
plus DLS group had a several day febrile episode related to
an aseptic
meningitis process. Laminectomy plus DLS is a safe and efficacious
alternative
to laminectomy for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.
The data
presented here suggests that myelopathic patients with a cervical
kyphosis are
best treated with an ACDF and that patients with a normal
cervical lordosis are
best treated with a posterior approach. Although some selected
patients may
benefit from DLS, no criteria are available which differentiate
this small
subset of patients.
PMID: 1802159
1: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1997 Apr;62(4):334-40
Pathogenesis of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.
Levine DN
Department of Neurology, New York University Medical Center,
New York, NY 10016,
USA.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether either of two mechanical
theories predicts the
topographic pattern of neuropathology in cervical spondylitic
myelopathy (CSM).
The compression theory states that the spinal cord is compressed
between a
spondylitic bar anteriorly and the ligamentum flava posteriorly.
The dentate
tension theory states that the spinal cord is pulled laterally
by the dentate
ligaments, which are tensed by an anterior spondylitic bar.
METHODS: The spinal
cord cross section, at the level of a spondylitic bar, is
modeled as a circular
disc subject to forces applied at its circumference. These
forces differ for the
two theories. From the pattern of forces at the circumference
the distribution
of shear stresses in the interior of the disc-that is, over
the transverse
section of the spinal cord-is calculated. With the assumption
that highly
stressed areas are most subject to damage, the stress pattern
predicted by each
theory can be compared to the topographic neuropathology of
CSM. RESULTS: The
predicted stress pattern of the dentate tension theory corresponds
to the
reported neuropathology, whereas the predicted stress pattern
of the compression
theory does not. CONCLUSIONS: The results strongly favor the
theory that CSM is
caused by tensile stresses transmitted to the spinal cord
from the dura via the
dentate ligaments. A spondylotic bar can increase dentate
tension by displacing
the spinal cord dorsally, while the dural attachments of the
dentate, anchored
by the dural root sleeves and dural ligaments, are displaced
less. The
spondylotic bar may also increase dentate tension by interfering
locally with
dural stretch during neck flexion, the resultant increase
in dural stress being
transmitted to the spinal cord via the dentate ligaments.
Flexion of the neck
increases dural tension and should be avoided in the conservative
treatment of
CSM. Both anterior and posterior extradural surgical operations
can diminish
dentate tension, which may explain their usefulness in CSM.
The generality of
these results must be tempered by the simplifying assumptions
required for the
mathematical model.
