Today, it is of the ultimate importance that healthcare professionals have an overview of medicine as practiced internationally − not just as it is practiced in Canada. Around the world, it has been demonstrated that governments and medicine seldom mix. Accordingly, all healthcare professionals, particularly physicians, must be independent practitioners who have only the best interests of the patient at heart and must therefore focus their efforts on this objective.

Unfortunately, system administrators seem to sprout ever enlarging bureaucracies often advised by physicians who are motivated by exercising political clout and their own pecuniary interest, rather than the welfare of patients.

Pharmaceutical companies, with their extensive lobbies and the support of government bureaucracies, are primarily driven to generate profits but nevertheless exert an excessive and unwarranted degree of influence in formulating healthcare policies, extending even to the educational process.

Insurance companies, as is increasingly evident, again are economically oriented and pose one of the most pernicious influences in healthcare today. Claims adjusters and low-level administrators frequently impose incredible hardship on patients desperately in need of funds to pay for both their specialized and routine health care, for which they have contributed premiums over many years.

The combination of gatekeepers consisting of governments, HMOs, Wall Street corporations, etc., further muddy the waters. There is no clarity existing with all the vested economic interests that at this point almost totally control healthcare delivery systems, whether in England, Cuba, Canada or Sweden.

In many instances, unfortunately, no healthcare at all may be preferable to what is actually provided. For example, wounds secondary to diabetes, atherosclerosis, and other etiological factors often show rapid improvement with simple elevation of the extremity and saline compresses to the wound 24/7, as compared to the utilization of multiple dressings, antibiotics and analgesics that are provided in such abundance, accompanied by rising costs. All too often, the latter approach leads to the eventual amputation of the afflicted limb.

Does anyone really care about these issues? Not as long as the care provided is perceived to be ‘free’. And what of the latter fact? A perfect excuse to levy more taxes, to expand the bureaucracy and order more diagnostics and consumables, all excluding the most important item – the correct therapy designed to cure the patient’s problem.

To elaborate on the insurance situation: each day, we see new patients at our clinics and invariably, at least initially, the priority item they wish to discuss is their insurance plight – rather than their medical condition. These patients rant on about how the insurance companies keep reneging on the promise to pay for their care. How can you blame them? This premise, after all, is why they bought insurance in the first place.
I recently uploaded on my blog the story of one particular family which serves as an excellent example of this growing problem. The husband was severely injured in an automobile accident over five years ago and has been unable to work since. The couple went broke paying their medical bills and were recently evicted from their home. Several insurance policies had been purchased by this individual, who owned a number of businesses that were thriving prior to the accident. Financial failure ensued after the trauma as the wife was busy taking care of her husband and two children and could not continue to manage their affairs.

Over five years later, the insurance companies are still fighting about who should pay for what. Anyone familiar with this paradigm knows that it can go on for many years, or at least until the patient expires.

At the same time, insurance companies spend considerable funds on diagnostics and these are seldom questioned, no matter how expensive they may be. They also spend unlimited funds carrying out assessments, investigations, etc., which allow them to renege on claims, aided and abetted by a hoard of assessors, bought and paid for by the carrier. The latter almost invariably find that there is no objective evidence to substantiate the disputed claim.

As for pharmaceuticals, these in many instances confer significant benefit. For example, insulin, thyroxin, cortisone, and analgesics, along with many other drugs, provide viable solutions – primarily in the short term, although often only by masking symptoms. Furthermore, drugs do have limitations and can produce adverse effects. In some instances, the latter may be significant. However, because the pressing need for these medications may override the objection to prolonged use, dependence becomes ‘justifiable’. That is certainly the case with diabetes and insulin, ACTH for adrenal insufficiency, thyroxin for hypothyroidism and a number of similar situations.

On the other hand, alternative therapies can and do provide highly effective solutions in the treatment of a plethora of medical conditions and do not produce adverse effects, either long or short-term, particularly in the treatment of arthritis, back problems and most conditions with the common factor of inflammation, a major component in most disease processes.

I first learned about Laser Therapy in 1988, having injured my right shoulder in a skiing accident in 1986. The injury included a complete tear of the supraspinatus tendon and a fracture of the humeral head generating chronic inflammation of the shoulder joint. Subsequent to this episode, I consulted a number of orthopedic surgeons and the general consensus was to perform an arthrogram to be followed by immediate surgery. Being a trained surgeon, I resisted the temptation to follow this approach, based on past experience, notwithstanding the fact that both orthopedic surgeons I consulted were highly competent and had the best of intentions. My conclusion was that this intervention, fully approved by the regulatory bodies, would not substantially benefit me and I therefore pursued an alternative course. Above all, I did not wish to be subjected to an additional trauma.

Unfortunately, prior to Laser Therapy, from 1986-1989 I was unable to play golf or swim on a regular basis, secondary to the discomfort and pain. Analgesics and anti-inflammatory medications produced undesirable side effects; moreover, I objected to them on basic principles. Periodically, when the symptoms became unbearable, I submitted to cortisone injections which, when properly placed, provided temporary relief. A permanent cure proved elusive.

Finally, I found a therapist equipped with a primitive European Laser device and in a short period of time, my shoulder pain subsided significantly. Inspired by this turn of events, I began my pursuit of self-education in the emerging technology of Laser Therapy. Over the course of two years, I read over 300 articles and 13 texts on this topic and participated in many national and international meetings exploring the subject.

Here are some observations noted on this journey:

 How little was really known about this therapeutic medium at that time.
 How much remained to be learned.
 How we must open our minds to new ideas, thoughts and solutions.
 How we must question tradition and “the way things have always been done”.
 How we must be critical of the massive amount of information and disinformation coursing through the net. This is extremely challenging and reminds me of my mother who often said, “I read the following in the newspaper.” My usual response would be, “I know that this is not true.” Her invariable retort was that “It would not be in the newspaper if it were not true!” She also believed in the infallibility of physicians, with the exclusion of myself. Unfortunately, that was the cause of her demise at the age of 93. Had it not been for a series of hospital blunders, she might still be alive today.
 We must always be aware of how the internet disseminates a mountain of data, all of which is of course documented by humans, many of whom have a vested interest in benefiting the propagator of the information provided.
 Creativity and independent thought must be encouraged. In a civilized world, these qualities inevitably lead to progress.
 Never be afraid to question or criticize authoritarianism in its varied forms.
 Do not permit economic conventions, inappropriate regulations, and other obstructions to get in the way of implementing better therapeutic solutions.

To cite some recent advances, I refer to:
o Stem Cell Therapy
o Genetic Modification (gene splicing)
o Robotic Surgery
o Laser Therapy, etc.

 All healthcare professionals should be encouraged to make the patient’s clinical status the focus of their endeavors.
 Most significant of all, are the advances in Laser Medicine over the past decade and the wide impact this should have on the quality of medical care, now and in the future.

When asked how he conducted research surveys indicating what product the company should build, Steve Jobs, the late departed CEO of Apple, stated, “Surveys of that type have no interest to me. I know what people need and that is what I give them.” To me, this represents a greater wisdom than the many aphorisms espoused daily by the leaders of the corporate world.
Steve Jobs may have been, in the eyes of some, a “son of a bitch” but he is one of the few who had the vision and courage to nurture his original concepts and ideas and translate them into reality. All of us should adopt this type of guidance to a greater degree. Personally, I like to think that in many ways Laser technology is developing along a similar trend.

At our clinics, the most significant results produced are in the treatment of arthritis, musculoskeletal problems, particularly the spine, dermatological conditions including wound healing, along with the all too common soft tissue and sports injuries, many of which have acquired the characteristics of chronicity.

In addition, we have discovered and are learning that Laser Therapy has the potential to treat more complex systemic conditions, particularly in situations where conventional methods have been ineffective.

In the past several years, stimulated by several neurological researchers, we have developed and refined some exciting new applications in the field of neurology, particularly with regard to the following conditions:

• Concussion
• CVAs
• Dementias
• Multiple Sclerosis
• Depression
• Anxiety Disorders
• Nerve Regeneration
• Spinal Cord Injuries
• Demyelinating Diseases (Gene 7 Paresis)

While only a relatively small number of these conditions have been treated, it must be noted that we have achieved a greater degree of success than anticipated. In keeping with the conventional one-line disclaimer so common in academic circles, “more studies are indicated”. At the same time, I must emphasize that we continue to meet, if not exceed, our expectations.

The constant road block? Insurance companies. They may be willing to pay for diagnostic services, but refuse to pay for actual therapy that may not yet be “authorized”. Again, this is one of the regressive forms of behaviour dictated by managed healthcare systems in the interest of economic considerations. While the focus is on diagnostics, there is a clear lack of enthusiasm for selecting and applying therapies designed to actually benefit the patient. This is commonly described as “risk management”.

Another problem I mentioned is that pharmaceuticals are generally paid for by the management systems in place. Whereas prescriptions are often written under the mystique of providing instant benefit, the reality is that an undetermined number of prescriptions are never filled, which may be a blessing in disguise. Two-hundred and ninety patient deaths are reported daily in North America – the result of pharmaceutical utilization. In reality there are probably thousands!

In 1998 an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that prescriptions legally written by physicians are the 4th leading cause of death.
In his 2012 book, Unaccountable, Dr. M Makary, a Johns Hopkins School of Medicine researcher, shows how “mining sickness for profit” makes everybody “unaccountable” – hence the book’s title. The book illuminates a description of how hospitals are a major cause of death and how at least 30% of conventional “healthcare” is unnecessary and leads to deadly results.

From my personal perspective, effective therapeutic solutions have always been integral to the agenda of any ethical medical practice. Again, instituting immediate treatment when the disease process begins, circumvents the obstructive process of bureaucracies in the treatment of both routine and complex medical conditions, while substantially reducing the cost of healthcare.

Remember that administrators and other gatekeepers have no real interest in finding the best possible medical solutions but focus instead on cost controls and their primary interest remains the bottom line.

For a good clinician, defining the correct diagnosis does not require a major effort. In most instances, it can be accurately determined by taking a detailed history and performing an equally thorough physical examination. This aspect of medical practice, unfortunately, is no longer de rigeur.

Diagnostic studies, which can be expensive and harmful, should only be employed when the practitioner is unable to arrive at a working diagnosis or to confirm the clinical diagnosis, if this is essential.

All too frequently, prolonged diagnostic studies, the prescription of inappropriate pharmaceuticals, cross consultations, and other non-relevant assessments delay the initiation of therapy and therefore the healing process. This approach is wasteful and one must remember that no pathology can be cured without initiating appropriate treatment, preferably immediately.

It is therefore paramount that Laser Therapy, which can be easily administered by therapists with a modicum of medical training, can and should be more widely implemented, particularly in situations where urgent and effective treatment is essential.

Today, evidence-based medicine is all too often related to double-blind studies, peer reviews and the literature. Sometimes these imply or provide automatic approval of therapies that may have minimal benefit at best. In view of this, one must always ask:
• Who finances these studies?
• How relevant are they?
• Who conducts them?
• And for what purpose?

My personal view is that when a patient presents with a problem and has undergone many studies and treatments without any measurable improvement that is clear evidence of failure. Unfortunately, in healthcare systems today there is no real accountability and supervision of progress may be spurious or even non-existent.
Confusion surrounding terminologies such as “evidence-based”, “scientific”, “double blind”, etc. may often be categorized as time based illusions. Healthcare professionals must adopt therapies that cure the problem rather than focusing on the modulation of symptoms and physician compensation codes. The latter is comparable to following a road leading to nowhere.

In our clinics, the problems that we treat most frequently include multi-level degenerative disc disease and single disc herniations, often accompanied by stenosis, radiculitis, etc. The success rate in these situations is over 90% and no adverse effects are produced. In a select number of cases we have performed follow-up MRIs and were not surprised to see that the problem had been resolved (i.e. the disc herniation could no longer be visualized).

Contrary to current concepts, we frequently encounter young athletes with dysfunctional knees. The basis of these pathologies consists of varying degrees of disruption of the anterior cruciate and/or other ligaments, meniscal tears, contusions, etc. Currently, these are almost invariably treated with surgical intervention, which can lead to complications and permanent dysfunction.

As the number of patients presenting at our clinic with these types of injuries has increased over the past several years, we have again been able to conduct follow-up MRI studies and complete healing has been reported most notably in cases where the original MRI read complete anterior cruciate ligament tear. It is my belief that in these instances, a portion of the anterior cruciate ligament remains intact, perhaps only 10%. Again, further studies are indicated and we are conducting these on an ongoing basis.
Without question, if my knee were injured I would use the conservative Laser Therapy approach and surgery could always be instituted at a later date if necessary; this is rarely the case.

It should be noted that frequently patients are successfully treated with Laser Therapy for conditions that have not improved with traditional therapies. Nevertheless, some physicians will comment that they do not believe in this therapy, and this often repeated statement stimulates some reflection on my part.

I believe that our planet sustains approximately 7 billion people and that over 90% of the entire population, I am informed, believes in some God, religious power or tradition. Without invoking blasphemy at any level, I have never been informed that anyone has actually had a conversation, discussion or meeting with a God. Nevertheless, a God of some form exists in almost everyone’s mind and historically the belief in a Dogma survives, particularly in the face of political repression attempting to dissuade citizens from maintaining this practice.

Obviously some remediation of the medical profession is indicated. It should be noted that in all cultures ignorance and non-believers exist. These have always been a mainstay of the human condition and the effort to maintain this status is sacrosanct to many. It feeds their ego, as they have established an opinion – right or wrong – and free-choice philosophy dictates that individuals can choose to be ignorant and incompetent if they wish and there is really nothing that can be done about that. Eventually, these non-believers may become extinct, hopefully replaced by those with more open and educable minds.

Needless to say, progress will require some leadership from educational institutions and governments. Hopefully this process will stimulate further reflection on our ethical and moral values. And then there is always the matter of mass conditioning. For instance, several years ago when a flu epidemic was rampant in Canada, people dealt with infinite lines to obtain the vaccine. Individuals lined up day and night to receive the shots and information was rapidly circulated about the clinics that had the shortest wait times. This persisted for several weeks. As soon as the flu vaccine became widely available, the lines almost instantly evaporated.

CONCLUDING COMMENTS:

• My vision is to exchange a Laser Therapy Unit for every prescription pad in existence.

• To take control of healthcare away from governments and other vested interests and return it to properly educated and trained healthcare professionals who possess an understanding of quality healthcare.

• Everyone reviewing this article should strive to become a creative and effective Laser Therapist.

• Embracing these concepts will improve every citizen’s healthcare immeasurably and wide application can reduce costs of delivery by billions of dollars.

It’s the fear every consumer has buying insurance. When it comes time to make a claim, your insurer will have some reason not to pay out.

The doomsday scenario isn’t just fantasy, it’s reality, say many people who fight insurance companies on a regular basis.

The issue was highlighted this week when a Saskatchewan judge awarded Luciano Branco $5-million, saying the actions of his insurance companies established “a pattern of abuse” — Justice Murray Acton noting he wanted to send a message to the industry.

The case could be a template for anyone paranoid about getting his or her claim cashed out.

The claimant in this case was a welder who was injured on the job. The judge noted the man, who suffered a permanent disability, was offered a “ridiculously low” settlement as the insurance companies dragged its feet for years on the claim.

While cases like this may not be the norm, Toronto lawyer Sivan Tumarkin has built a legal practice around getting insurance companies to pay up.

“I’m just getting more and more of these,” said Mr. Tumarkin, who used to work for insurance companies in a defense capacity. “I only started doing this because I had people coming to me who were having issues with insurance companies. You have a flooded home and they won’t cover. I have someone [who gets sick] in New York with travel insurance and they won’t cover.”

He says the insurance companies don’t out and out reject claims for no reason but their objections are in many cases for negligible reasons.

Mr. Tumarkin had an older couple as clients recently who put in a health claim for a fracture suffered by the wife while on vacation in the U.S. The claim was paid but the insurance company when back into their medical records and found out some of the information filled out in the application was incorrect and demanded $30,000 back.

The basis of many insurance claim rejections is something on a policy being filled out incorrectly, either on purpose or because of a misunderstanding.

You buy a life insurance policy and say you don’t smoke even though you have the occasional butt at a bar. One day you get killed in a car accident. If your insurer finds out about your occasional indulgence, there’s a good chance they’ll fight the claim.

“The law is you have to answer truthfully but it is ambiguous about the way you might answer the question as a lay person,” says Mr. Tumarkin. “They’ll look at absolutely everything they can to try and not cover you. I’m not saying in every case but a lot of them.”

He says insurance companies in property damage claims on car accidents will drag their feet on an investigation, knowing there is time limit to sue.

Out and out rejection of claims to meet some quota is probably more something you see in movies, says Mr. Tumarkin. “There is willful blindness on the part of adjusters,” he says. “There is never absolutely no reason they don’t pay. They’ll just use every excuse in the book.”

Pete Karageorgos, manager of consumer and industry relations with the Insurance Bureau of Canada which represents home and auto insurers, says there are no statistics on what percentage of claims get rejected.

But on the auto front, the industry has statistics that show in Ontario in 2010, the sector took in $9.4-billion in premiums and paid out $8.3-billion.

“It goes to show you the majority of money coming in goes right back out to pay claims,” said Mr. Karageorgos.

He adds insurance is a contract and any insurance adjuster will look at the conditions that could negate the agreement.

“Insurance companies are not just going to take your word for it,” said Mr. Karageorgos. “For any contract to be valid and effective, the conditions on both parties parts need to be satisfied.”

The issue for many people in hiring a lawyer is the up front cost. In the Saskatchewan case, the welder who sued his insurance companies had to be bailed out financial by family members.

One thing you can work out in some cases is an agreement whereby your legal bill is covered based on a contingency fee basis, your lawyer gets his bill paid from the winnings.

You can also consider taking your insurance company to Small Claims Court.

Another suggestion for consumers is buy insurance products from a broker, who is compensated by the insurance company but not employed by them. By using the broker, you have the added possibility of suing the broker if he or she gave you bad information when filling out your policy.

Some policies get reviewed by insurance companies before they are issued and people are rejected or assessed at a higher rate, such as in life insurance. But for low margin products like travel insurance, there is no investigation until a claim is submitted.

“You have the policy underwritten at the time of application not at the time of claim, so there is no surprises and it is completely on the up and up,” said certified financial planner Mark Halpern, of illnessprotection.com.

Sometimes he’ll get a client who wants to say he doesn’t smoke when he does occasionally and Mr. Halpern rejects that business because he doesn’t want to see the claim eventually dismissed.

In other cases, people make innocent mistakes about the type of medication or the maladies they have had in the past.

“It’s really important you keep a record of your medical history,” said Mr. Halpern.

He doesn’t dismiss the notion that insurance companies will reject claims for flimsy reasons and says a broker can be an important advocate on your behalf in that situation.

“If that doesn’t work, there is always [a lawyer],” said Mr. Halpern, noting in many cases the presence of lawyer leads to some type of settlement.

“The insurance don’t like to have bad press but they don’t want these things lingering if there is something [that could work against them]. In the worst case, you might get some settlement,” he says.

Alex Saltykov, founder of InsureEye Inc. which follows the industry, says there are no statistics to show what percentage of claims are paid out.

He says consumers really have to make sure they know what is covered and not because insurance policy are so complicated.

Mr. Saltykov found himself not completely covered for treatment he needed for physiotherapy because he had not read the terms of his insurance contract.

“You want it to be there in the worst moment of your life,” said Mr. Saltykov. “If you are not sure of what should be disclosed, you better disclose it even it makes your insurance go up. Otherwise you risk your company not paying.”

The article below obtained from the Northern Miner, April 24th, once again demonstrates the deceptive practices of insurance companies who collect premiums on the basis of false advertising and then fail to honor their obligations to the patient. When will our politicians take note and rectify these serious problems?

Luciano Branco’s long and soul-destroying battle with insurance firms AIG and Zurich has finally reached some satisfaction in the courts, with a Saskatoon judge awarding the injured Portuguese-Canadian welder $450,000 in aggravated damages and $4.5 million in punitive damages. It’s the largest award of its kind ever given by a Canadian court against insurance companies.
Branco, now 62, immigrated at age 24 to Canada, where he learned to weld and worked out West and up North. In 1994 he moved back to Portugal, and by 1997 was working at Cameco-subsidiary Cameco Gold’s (now Centerra Gold) huge Kumtor open-pit gold mine in Kyrgyzstan.
During a 12-hour shift on Dec. 25, 1999, he dropped a steel plate on his foot. He finished his shift, packed his foot in ice, and returned to Portugal at the end of his 28-day rotation to recuperate. Towards the end of his next rotation, he stepped on a piece of steel and reinjured his foot, and then sought medical treatment in Portugal, missing his next rotation.
He only reported his injury to the Kumtor operating company on his next rotation in June 2000, when he did not work at the camp. Kumtor continued to pay his base salary of $51,920 to the end of his contract in March 2001 (in fact, overpaying him $12,000 by mistake).
Anxious to get back to work, Branco had surgery on his foot in January 2001, but it was unsuccessful. Despite physiotherapy and rehabilitation treatments, Branco’s Portuguese doctor determined that he was permanently disabled and in chronic pain, a prognosis repeated many times in the following years by specialists in Canada.
American Home Assurance Co. (AIG) was advised of Branco’s work-related injury in mid-2000, which triggered the Saskatchewan Workers’ Compensation Board-equivalent claim handled under the AIG policy. His long-term disability benefits were covered by Zurich Insurance.
To make a long story short, AIG and Zurich refused to pay out the benefits owed to Branco, hoping the outrageously long delays, transcontinental complexities and non-stop legal bills would grind him down and force him to accept a much lower settlement.
In the recent judgment, Justice Murray Acton found that AIG and Zurich had acted in a “cruel and malicious” manner towards Branco for more than a decade, offering him “ridiculously low” settlements, including AIG initially offering him a cash settlement of just US$22,500. AIG didn’t make some of its payments owed to Branco until the day of the trial.
Zurich, for its part, internally approved Branco’s long-term disability payment in 2002, but never informed Branco, who didn’t receive his first funds from Zurich until 2009 and had turned down Zurich’s settlement offer of $62,900, minus $9,000 in legal costs in April 2003. “This court cannot imagine a more protracted and reprehensible behaviour than that of Zurich in blatantly refusing to pay what had been owed in monthly payments for almost eight years,” Acton writes in his decision. “The actions of AIG and Zurich establish a pattern of abuse of an individual suffering from financial and emotional vulnerability.” (The judge said that the mining company had treated Branco fairly, and only the insurance companies were liable for damages.)
The judge noted that prior to his injury, Branco was a “proud, athletic and hard-working individual” who was “warm, friendly and sensitive” and an “excellent employee” at Kumtor. After the injury and the withholding of benefits, however, he had become a “demoralized man full of sadness and loss of pleasure,” and an individual “full of anxiety and depression.”
The insurance companies, Acton writes, “virtually destroyed Branco’s life over the last 13 years,” causing his marriage to break down and financial burdens to be placed on his daughter and other family members, and his legal representation. The judge writes that the insurance companies tried to use Branco’s diminished life to “gain leverage” over him and force him to accept a low settlement.
“That Branco was able to continue to withstand this pressure for so many years from two different fronts is truly remarkable and almost superhuman, even though his resistance may have resulted in irreparable mental distress, which may last for the remainder of his lifetime,” Acton writes. “The question remains: how many individuals have been unable to withstand the financial and psychological pressure of these tactics?”
The insurance companies are expected to appeal the decision.

Many illnesses share common DNA roots. The five most common mental illnesses present in the following order:

1. Autism.
2. ADD.
3. Bipolar disease.
4. Schizophrenia.
5. Depression.

The latest research published in the journal Lancet indicates that all these diseases are the result of genetic variations, some of which have been extensively reviewed. i.e.:

• Chromosome 3
• Chromosome 10
• Calcium channels, which play a significant factor in controlling cell function
• Environmental influences

This synopsis of mental illnesses and the factors involved (many of which are unknown) are challenging, particularly with regard to effective therapies.

Currently, there is an extensive amount of research being carried out in many leading clinical and research centres throughout the world and it would appear that genetic factors may be pre-eminent as the etiological causes responsible for these disease processes.

Laser Therapy is beginning to play a role in this therapeutic area, which of course is important, in order to achieve positive clinical outcomes. Some of the effects of Laser Therapy on neurological tissue include the following:

• Increase in ATP production raising energy levels within the cells
• Increased deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and ribonucleic acid (RNA)
• Increased nitric oxide (NO) release
• Enhanced cytochrome c oxidase activity
• Modulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS)
• Modifications to intracellular organelle membrane activity
• Cytoprotective effects
• Down-regulation of pro-inflammatory mediators
• Increase in secretion of anti-inflammatory mediators
• Angiogenesis
• Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity facilitation

All of these physiological activities produce a neuromodulating or neuromedation type of effect, particularly on brain tissue.

This commentary is appropriate as at this time more effective therapies need to be developed to deal with these problems. At Meditech, we have had a long standing interest in these pathologies and recent discussions with several neuroscientists stimulate our efforts to accelerate the development of reliable therapeutic options.

As an increasing number of patients are treated, we gain experience, establish effective protocols and expect that our work in the treatment of these complex and problematic conditions will be particularly rewarding for patients.