Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video

To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

Posted by Dr Dennis Kiper on 8/01/02 at 19:42 (091341)

In the last few days I've started to follow and answer posts from the people on these message boards. I can see that you are extremely happy with my services and I'm glad to have been of help and look forward to continuing that help as things change.
I feel however that you're making the SDO out to be some sort of 'miracle cure'. Well for some it may have been, for others it has simply been successful like an orthotic that works should. The truth is that while it is a good product (I admittedly think it's the best) I have had a share of failures as well. Most of those failures have come from patients with chronic, complex PF (and related biomechanical conditions). It is this group that faces the greatest challenge in the healing process, primarily because of the level of frustration and dissapointment in feeling relief.
Because the muscle tissues are so badly damaged from years of tension, spasm and pain, it can take an inordinate amount of time to break the pain cycle. It is here that I believe something like ESWT can be of great value.
I personally would not recommend it as a routine program of treatment though.
There are other good products out there that can help, many a lot cheaper.
But I do appreciate your efforts, I realize that you are extremely happy with your results and of those you've referred. I am a little embarrased though of how happy you are. But thanks.

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/01/02 at 20:02 (091344)

There may come a time when within two weeks ESWT is used and the patient is placed back into his well fitted shoes with a good rigid shanks and the millions of dollars wasted on injections, orthosis, padding heel lifts etc are over.

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

kay on 8/01/02 at 21:27 (091351)

if thats the case then why is there so many failures with the eswt? has anyone here been 'cured' by it?

kay

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/01/02 at 23:18 (091359)

Yes There use to be a section on this site that listed all the cures but Scott removed it

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

kay on 8/02/02 at 14:11 (091436)

why was it removed?
those are the post we really need to see.
:( all i ever hear is of the failures.

kay

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/02/02 at 14:38 (091438)

The site which everyone is speaking about reporting cures were results mostly from one physician's s office using a machine that was and is still not FDA approved to be used in treating Plantar Fasciitis.

This machine which you sometimes see postings about on this board is now refered to as the Big 'O' because the FDA required it not be referenced on the site.

If there have been other ESWT total cure postings by individuals they have been few and far between. The remainder and majority of postings from individuals having ESWT seem to either report some improvement or no improvement. Few if any 100% total cures have been posted by individual's here who have been treated by the two FDA approved machines that I can remember.

Re: To Kay

kay on 8/03/02 at 15:34 (091493)

if so few cures come from this treatment then why is it brought up by the doctors here every chance they get.

myself i have not seen any post saying they were cured. having the surgery sucks too.
i am depressed.:(
kay

Re: To Kay

Tonya on 8/03/02 at 16:55 (091497)

Thank you Kay for asking that question.:) Tonya

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/03/02 at 19:12 (091499)

Kay,
What I think you need to understand is that no procedure or doctor can promise a 100% cure. Nothing can, however, until the development of ESWT the only choice for a patient suffering with P.F. were all the conservative treatments that Scott describes in his book and various types of P.F. release surgery.

The development of ESWT gives the patient another shot at what might provide some relief and perhaps in some cases a cure. Until you actually get a cure there is no guarantee just like there is no guarantee with surgery. But trying a non-invasive treatment before having someone cut you is always a wiser decision.

Since no guarantee come with either treatment, if ESWT helps you don't need to be cut. This is to your advantage in many way. You can never return a cut plantar fascia to its original state so if a non-invasive treatment can provide you with the same, similar or even better result the patient is better off trying the non-invasive procedure first.

Someone will always be there to cut your plantar fascia, but they will never guarantee once cut you will be 100% cured or pain free.

Now to address your question on why so many doctors on this site bring up ESWT, it's because they own their own ESWT machine or have partnered with others to provide the treatment. It gives them another conservative treatment that they can offer before suggesting a patient under go a surgery.

Dr. Zuckerman's Dornier ESWT machine is in a mobile unit, kind of like a mobile mamogram trailer that can travel, and he has posted that his ESWT group now consists of 35 doctors. Many of the doctors that post here are part of that group so you hear a lot about ESWT. There are a few doctors who post that are not part of his large group. I believe they are Dr. Joe, Dr. Kiper and possibly Dr. Ed. I don't know if they offer ESWT or not, but those that belong to Dr. Z's group do, and with several of them posting we hear a lot about ESWT.

If you are a P.F. patient, having another conservative treatment to try is a good thing. Surgery of any kind should always be your last choice when all other treatments have failed, not your first.

Re: To Kay

Tonya on 8/03/02 at 20:30 (091503)

Where do these doctors practice? Anyone close to NC? Also, i believe i had seen pricing estimates posted on here before, but can anyone give me a good idea as to how much the treatment runs?

Re: To Kay

BrianG on 8/03/02 at 22:16 (091509)

Hi Tonya,

Dr. Z's group is from NJ, PA and Del. You can check out their website at http://www.eswtusa.com I don't know about prices, thats something you'd have to call for.

Good luck
BrianG

PS: I drove down from MA, about 7 hours.

Re: We need the Treatment board back.

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/03/02 at 22:21 (091510)

At one tiem we had a treatment posting board for ESWT. This is where the patient posted their experience with ESWT. The results for ESWT on that board were about 80%. There was just an article on ESWT in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery. The ESWT results for that study were 82%.

Re: To Dr. Z We need the Treatment board back.

Pauline on 8/03/02 at 23:11 (091515)

DR. Z,
If the Big 'O' is still going through FDA trials, I'd think they would want the great results that were posted here by your patients. Have they requested you send them?

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/03/02 at 23:23 (091517)

I believe you answered your own question when you posted this.

Re: Had Surgery 2 Years Ago view thread
Posted by kay on 7/31/02 at 16:59

sounds like to me that your pf is just in the first stages. it can be treated without surgery. i'd opt for any kind of treatment other than surgery if i could help it.
kay

Re: To Dr. Z We need the Treatment board back.

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/04/02 at 08:01 (091527)

It has to be a new study from the beginning. One which I have chosen not to participate

Re: To Dr. Z We need the Treatment board back.

Pauline on 8/04/02 at 14:21 (091553)

Then I think their results are the one's that would warrant posting if they won't accept yours.

Re: To Kay

kay on 8/05/02 at 13:55 (091646)

pauline, i realize that any treatment course that is non cutting is worth trying before cutting. what i was saying is that i have not heard or read ANYONE say that it helped them or cured them. thats not to say that it isn't a good thing. but if casting never helped anyone i wouldn't want to go through it. do you see what i am saying? i just read in this thread that results of the eswt is around 80%. but isn't these results from people who are selling their services?
when i had my first surgery 6 years ago (endoscopic) i would never have done it if i knew the % of good results were so low. but the pod i seen said it was 85%. since that time i have always heard the doctors giving high % rate of cure but read differently. one doctor told me if anyone gave me a 85% rate of cure that it was a lie. fda says the shock therapy is 62%, doctors here say closer too 82%. make one go mmmmmmmmm
kay

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/05/02 at 15:08 (091653)

I think your right to be skeptical because as you say the people reporting these numbers are not the individuals themselves. Instead it's the doctors advertising their treatment.

We have not had many if any individuals posting by themselves the same results being talked about since the approval of the Ossatron and now the Dornier. I think your mmmmmmmmmmmmmm isn't out of line.

I think Elliott is looking up the FDA reports for a reference point, but I thought someone said they were missing from the FDA site. Strange isn't it. Wonder why they would pull the records.

Re: here's a link...

elliott on 8/05/02 at 15:36 (091655)

to my post to Dr. Z, now well buried, on the inserts/orthotics/shoes board; sounds like you didn't see it yet.

bbv.cgi?n=91590

I'm not saying the Dornier Epos can't possibly be PF's penicillin, only that all of medicine seems to work this way: they come up with something new, claim 100% success, get knocked back down to reality by the next wave of studies, then improve the machine or drug or technique, then sort of settle in on a more accurate number with time.

--

Re: To Pauline

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/05/02 at 20:19 (091681)

The results that I am reporting are from the FDA studies. I have never reported a percentage other then the FDA study.. Why are you thinking that the records have been pulled. Why is everything oh something must be wrong. I am surprised that you don't research something before crying there is a fire in the house. Come on lets stop with the emotions and just tell the facts.

If someone is skeptical about ESWT so let it be. They have the right to think and do whatever they want to do.

Re: I couldn't find it either....

BrianG on 8/05/02 at 21:22 (091700)

DrZ, I too went to the FDA site looking for the Dornier results. They are not there. They have been gone for months. If you have a previous copy, or it's located somewhere else, could you provide a link for us. I'd appreciate it.

Thanks
BrianG

Re: Dr. Z

elliott on 8/05/02 at 21:42 (091704)

Women are more emotional, you know that. :-)

I don't think anyone here suspects you of cooking the books (and as you say, no one here has even reached your one-year mark). At the same time, not everyone believes the FDA-approved study you quote purporting to show 92% average pain reduction either, although it would be nice to read it first. The FDA removed the section dealing with efficacy; click below and then on Part II:

http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/pdf/p000048.html

Is this suspicious, as in thunder rolls? I don't know; I just want to read the study, that's all. You'd think others would too, or at least a summary of it, before shelling out big bucks for treatment. Couldn't find anything in a web search (other than the 60% success rate observed in a trial in Mass. on the same machine--any comment on that?).

Anyway, even if 92% is what the study came up with (was Dornier in charge of the study? were there independent monitors?), almost all new medical studies claiming fabulous results seem to get knocked down in time upon closer inspection.

---

Re: Dr. Z

wendyn on 8/05/02 at 22:50 (091711)

And of course, since she's a female - her problem is that she is 'emotional'.

If one is a male - perhaps he is more 'persistent' or 'determined'.

Females are just more 'emotional'. The underlying point isn't important - it's okay to just write it off based on a simplistic notion of gender stereotype.

That's okay though - I find it just as easy to blow off some comments by saying

'HE is more narrow minded - you know that' :)

;)

Re: and sensitive :-)

elliott on 8/05/02 at 23:36 (091712)

It was just a joke to lighten the tense air, not an honest evaluation on this woman (whose knowledge and opinions I respect, including her very doubts prompting the joke itself) or women in general, something I thought in context would be abundantly clear. Did that not get through? (PS--in case you are relying almost exclusively on the latest posts feature, it helps to go to the actual threads on each board to get context.)

Anyway, if my memory serves me, a long time ago you posted that women are in general more emotional, their posts tend to reflect that, and the support they need helps explain why they make up the bulk of this board. Hope your opinions are not doing a disservice to your species. :-)

---

Re: Dr. Z

kay on 8/05/02 at 23:47 (091713)

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/ANS01045.html

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

elliott on 8/06/02 at 08:07 (091720)

Wrong machine.

--

Re: Dr. Z

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/06/02 at 08:09 (091721)

Ok

Here is the problem. The FDA studies only were reported for 12 weeks. The FDA sites continued to follow up for one year the same patients. This is the report that I am talking about. So it came from the sites and not the FDA study, but it was the same patients

Re: and sensitive :-)

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 08:27 (091724)

Elliott,
Could be she was talking to more than one man. You weren't the first person to attach 'Women's emotions' to my post. As you say, you picked up on what was already in print.

There was no crying 'fire in the house'. I was simply supporting Kay's
opinion. Both you and Brian pointed out the Dornier information is missing off the FDA site. I didn't make an empty statement.

If I remember correctly what I posted about the Big 'O' was quite accurate. The story played itself out on this site as posted.

Re: and sensitive :-)

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/06/02 at 08:30 (091725)

If you were wrong about the Big O . ESWT would be at a price of $500 due to the FDA cost reductions. Anyway we are back at the Class three and the thousands of thousands of dollars that either the insurance company or the patient will have to spend in the USA

Re: and sensitive :-)

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 08:43 (091727)

Ah, the fact remains I did my homework and I wasn't wrong. The rest is pure speculation.

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 10:20 (091733)

Elliott,
The article Kay posted is refering to the Ossatron an FDA approved ESWT machine. It's not the Big 'O' often discussed here which was not FDA approved and can no longer be referenced on this site.

For clairfication readers need to know these are two different machines.

Re: "O"ops!

elliott on 8/06/02 at 10:44 (091736)

Thanks for the correction. Baby 'O' is how I used to call this one. But my point was that I'm not sure what Kay's posting is doing in this thread; we're talking about the Dornier Epos, a machine Dr. Z claims is far superior to the Ossatron.

--

Re: "O"ops!

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/06/02 at 11:38 (091739)

Since you brought out my statement concerning why I think the dornier is superior to the ossatron here is my opinion

1. Sparkgap Technology was invented by dornier and they don't use it now.
2. Inline ultrasound shows you where to target the area at the insertion.
3. EMSE is more efficient with production and rate per minute of shockwaves
4. With the ossatron due to lack of inline ultrasound you have to go from the bottom and therefore have to have IV sedation and or general anesthesia.
5. Dornier has much more experience in both the EWSL and the ESWT market, world wide.

Thats all I can think for now.

Re: Dr. Z

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 15:44 (091759)

Was the information compiled into a single report? Who has it now?

Re: Yes, I've been cured......

JudyS on 8/07/02 at 15:37 (091873)

I had two treatments last year. The second was very nearly one year ago. I feel that one foot is completely cured. I feel that the other still has occasional morning or stiffness insertion soreness at about a level of one or two and I may see about one more zap on that foot. I haven't decided yet.

I feel that my ESWT with Dr. Z, provided, at the very least, an environment in which my feet could then respond well to standard, consistent treatments such as stretching, ibuprofen, strengthening. Without the ESWT, I feel that I was doomed to either surgery or more crippling scarring. We all always knew that the ESWT, or even surgery , had to be followed with proper foot care - shoes, strengthening, stretching, etc. If I recall my ESWT education correctly, the purpose of it, on a very chronic condition, is to provide a means by which healing blood flow could 'get to' the scarred, inflamed tissue. Then it's up to the sufferer to work at footwear, strengthening, etc. and to keep inflammation down as opposed to going out and reinjuring all over again.

Yes, I think it has worked well for me.

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

kay on 8/07/02 at 16:07 (091878)

two different machines but don't they work the same? isn't the difference's between them very small?
kat

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

kay on 8/07/02 at 16:12 (091879)

i guess i should read the rest of the thread before i post. judy it is nice to hear someone is having a positive response to the eswt. heck its nice to hear something positive from anything.
maybe by the time i am ready to do something with my other foot it will be closer to me and paid for by my insurance.
i have aetna....does anyone know if they are looking at it again?
kay

Re: Dr. Z

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/08/02 at 15:14 (091992)

It is a the form of a summary. Dornier has the information. I have the graph

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

Rebecca C on 8/24/02 at 22:33 (093443)

Please tell me what is this miracle cure? Do you have a web site?

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/01/02 at 20:02 (091344)

There may come a time when within two weeks ESWT is used and the patient is placed back into his well fitted shoes with a good rigid shanks and the millions of dollars wasted on injections, orthosis, padding heel lifts etc are over.

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

kay on 8/01/02 at 21:27 (091351)

if thats the case then why is there so many failures with the eswt? has anyone here been 'cured' by it?

kay

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/01/02 at 23:18 (091359)

Yes There use to be a section on this site that listed all the cures but Scott removed it

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

kay on 8/02/02 at 14:11 (091436)

why was it removed?
those are the post we really need to see.
:( all i ever hear is of the failures.

kay

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/02/02 at 14:38 (091438)

The site which everyone is speaking about reporting cures were results mostly from one physician's s office using a machine that was and is still not FDA approved to be used in treating Plantar Fasciitis.

This machine which you sometimes see postings about on this board is now refered to as the Big 'O' because the FDA required it not be referenced on the site.

If there have been other ESWT total cure postings by individuals they have been few and far between. The remainder and majority of postings from individuals having ESWT seem to either report some improvement or no improvement. Few if any 100% total cures have been posted by individual's here who have been treated by the two FDA approved machines that I can remember.

Re: To Kay

kay on 8/03/02 at 15:34 (091493)

if so few cures come from this treatment then why is it brought up by the doctors here every chance they get.

myself i have not seen any post saying they were cured. having the surgery sucks too.
i am depressed.:(
kay

Re: To Kay

Tonya on 8/03/02 at 16:55 (091497)

Thank you Kay for asking that question.:) Tonya

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/03/02 at 19:12 (091499)

Kay,
What I think you need to understand is that no procedure or doctor can promise a 100% cure. Nothing can, however, until the development of ESWT the only choice for a patient suffering with P.F. were all the conservative treatments that Scott describes in his book and various types of P.F. release surgery.

The development of ESWT gives the patient another shot at what might provide some relief and perhaps in some cases a cure. Until you actually get a cure there is no guarantee just like there is no guarantee with surgery. But trying a non-invasive treatment before having someone cut you is always a wiser decision.

Since no guarantee come with either treatment, if ESWT helps you don't need to be cut. This is to your advantage in many way. You can never return a cut plantar fascia to its original state so if a non-invasive treatment can provide you with the same, similar or even better result the patient is better off trying the non-invasive procedure first.

Someone will always be there to cut your plantar fascia, but they will never guarantee once cut you will be 100% cured or pain free.

Now to address your question on why so many doctors on this site bring up ESWT, it's because they own their own ESWT machine or have partnered with others to provide the treatment. It gives them another conservative treatment that they can offer before suggesting a patient under go a surgery.

Dr. Zuckerman's Dornier ESWT machine is in a mobile unit, kind of like a mobile mamogram trailer that can travel, and he has posted that his ESWT group now consists of 35 doctors. Many of the doctors that post here are part of that group so you hear a lot about ESWT. There are a few doctors who post that are not part of his large group. I believe they are Dr. Joe, Dr. Kiper and possibly Dr. Ed. I don't know if they offer ESWT or not, but those that belong to Dr. Z's group do, and with several of them posting we hear a lot about ESWT.

If you are a P.F. patient, having another conservative treatment to try is a good thing. Surgery of any kind should always be your last choice when all other treatments have failed, not your first.

Re: To Kay

Tonya on 8/03/02 at 20:30 (091503)

Where do these doctors practice? Anyone close to NC? Also, i believe i had seen pricing estimates posted on here before, but can anyone give me a good idea as to how much the treatment runs?

Re: To Kay

BrianG on 8/03/02 at 22:16 (091509)

Hi Tonya,

Dr. Z's group is from NJ, PA and Del. You can check out their website at http://www.eswtusa.com I don't know about prices, thats something you'd have to call for.

Good luck
BrianG

PS: I drove down from MA, about 7 hours.

Re: We need the Treatment board back.

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/03/02 at 22:21 (091510)

At one tiem we had a treatment posting board for ESWT. This is where the patient posted their experience with ESWT. The results for ESWT on that board were about 80%. There was just an article on ESWT in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery. The ESWT results for that study were 82%.

Re: To Dr. Z We need the Treatment board back.

Pauline on 8/03/02 at 23:11 (091515)

DR. Z,
If the Big 'O' is still going through FDA trials, I'd think they would want the great results that were posted here by your patients. Have they requested you send them?

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/03/02 at 23:23 (091517)

I believe you answered your own question when you posted this.

Re: Had Surgery 2 Years Ago view thread
Posted by kay on 7/31/02 at 16:59

sounds like to me that your pf is just in the first stages. it can be treated without surgery. i'd opt for any kind of treatment other than surgery if i could help it.
kay

Re: To Dr. Z We need the Treatment board back.

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/04/02 at 08:01 (091527)

It has to be a new study from the beginning. One which I have chosen not to participate

Re: To Dr. Z We need the Treatment board back.

Pauline on 8/04/02 at 14:21 (091553)

Then I think their results are the one's that would warrant posting if they won't accept yours.

Re: To Kay

kay on 8/05/02 at 13:55 (091646)

pauline, i realize that any treatment course that is non cutting is worth trying before cutting. what i was saying is that i have not heard or read ANYONE say that it helped them or cured them. thats not to say that it isn't a good thing. but if casting never helped anyone i wouldn't want to go through it. do you see what i am saying? i just read in this thread that results of the eswt is around 80%. but isn't these results from people who are selling their services?
when i had my first surgery 6 years ago (endoscopic) i would never have done it if i knew the % of good results were so low. but the pod i seen said it was 85%. since that time i have always heard the doctors giving high % rate of cure but read differently. one doctor told me if anyone gave me a 85% rate of cure that it was a lie. fda says the shock therapy is 62%, doctors here say closer too 82%. make one go mmmmmmmmm
kay

Re: To Kay

Pauline on 8/05/02 at 15:08 (091653)

I think your right to be skeptical because as you say the people reporting these numbers are not the individuals themselves. Instead it's the doctors advertising their treatment.

We have not had many if any individuals posting by themselves the same results being talked about since the approval of the Ossatron and now the Dornier. I think your mmmmmmmmmmmmmm isn't out of line.

I think Elliott is looking up the FDA reports for a reference point, but I thought someone said they were missing from the FDA site. Strange isn't it. Wonder why they would pull the records.

Re: here's a link...

elliott on 8/05/02 at 15:36 (091655)

to my post to Dr. Z, now well buried, on the inserts/orthotics/shoes board; sounds like you didn't see it yet.

bbv.cgi?n=91590

I'm not saying the Dornier Epos can't possibly be PF's penicillin, only that all of medicine seems to work this way: they come up with something new, claim 100% success, get knocked back down to reality by the next wave of studies, then improve the machine or drug or technique, then sort of settle in on a more accurate number with time.

--

Re: To Pauline

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/05/02 at 20:19 (091681)

The results that I am reporting are from the FDA studies. I have never reported a percentage other then the FDA study.. Why are you thinking that the records have been pulled. Why is everything oh something must be wrong. I am surprised that you don't research something before crying there is a fire in the house. Come on lets stop with the emotions and just tell the facts.

If someone is skeptical about ESWT so let it be. They have the right to think and do whatever they want to do.

Re: I couldn't find it either....

BrianG on 8/05/02 at 21:22 (091700)

DrZ, I too went to the FDA site looking for the Dornier results. They are not there. They have been gone for months. If you have a previous copy, or it's located somewhere else, could you provide a link for us. I'd appreciate it.

Thanks
BrianG

Re: Dr. Z

elliott on 8/05/02 at 21:42 (091704)

Women are more emotional, you know that. :-)

I don't think anyone here suspects you of cooking the books (and as you say, no one here has even reached your one-year mark). At the same time, not everyone believes the FDA-approved study you quote purporting to show 92% average pain reduction either, although it would be nice to read it first. The FDA removed the section dealing with efficacy; click below and then on Part II:

http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/pdf/p000048.html

Is this suspicious, as in thunder rolls? I don't know; I just want to read the study, that's all. You'd think others would too, or at least a summary of it, before shelling out big bucks for treatment. Couldn't find anything in a web search (other than the 60% success rate observed in a trial in Mass. on the same machine--any comment on that?).

Anyway, even if 92% is what the study came up with (was Dornier in charge of the study? were there independent monitors?), almost all new medical studies claiming fabulous results seem to get knocked down in time upon closer inspection.

---

Re: Dr. Z

wendyn on 8/05/02 at 22:50 (091711)

And of course, since she's a female - her problem is that she is 'emotional'.

If one is a male - perhaps he is more 'persistent' or 'determined'.

Females are just more 'emotional'. The underlying point isn't important - it's okay to just write it off based on a simplistic notion of gender stereotype.

That's okay though - I find it just as easy to blow off some comments by saying

'HE is more narrow minded - you know that' :)

;)

Re: and sensitive :-)

elliott on 8/05/02 at 23:36 (091712)

It was just a joke to lighten the tense air, not an honest evaluation on this woman (whose knowledge and opinions I respect, including her very doubts prompting the joke itself) or women in general, something I thought in context would be abundantly clear. Did that not get through? (PS--in case you are relying almost exclusively on the latest posts feature, it helps to go to the actual threads on each board to get context.)

Anyway, if my memory serves me, a long time ago you posted that women are in general more emotional, their posts tend to reflect that, and the support they need helps explain why they make up the bulk of this board. Hope your opinions are not doing a disservice to your species. :-)

---

Re: Dr. Z

kay on 8/05/02 at 23:47 (091713)

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/ANS01045.html

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

elliott on 8/06/02 at 08:07 (091720)

Wrong machine.

--

Re: Dr. Z

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/06/02 at 08:09 (091721)

Ok

Here is the problem. The FDA studies only were reported for 12 weeks. The FDA sites continued to follow up for one year the same patients. This is the report that I am talking about. So it came from the sites and not the FDA study, but it was the same patients

Re: and sensitive :-)

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 08:27 (091724)

Elliott,
Could be she was talking to more than one man. You weren't the first person to attach 'Women's emotions' to my post. As you say, you picked up on what was already in print.

There was no crying 'fire in the house'. I was simply supporting Kay's
opinion. Both you and Brian pointed out the Dornier information is missing off the FDA site. I didn't make an empty statement.

If I remember correctly what I posted about the Big 'O' was quite accurate. The story played itself out on this site as posted.

Re: and sensitive :-)

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/06/02 at 08:30 (091725)

If you were wrong about the Big O . ESWT would be at a price of $500 due to the FDA cost reductions. Anyway we are back at the Class three and the thousands of thousands of dollars that either the insurance company or the patient will have to spend in the USA

Re: and sensitive :-)

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 08:43 (091727)

Ah, the fact remains I did my homework and I wasn't wrong. The rest is pure speculation.

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 10:20 (091733)

Elliott,
The article Kay posted is refering to the Ossatron an FDA approved ESWT machine. It's not the Big 'O' often discussed here which was not FDA approved and can no longer be referenced on this site.

For clairfication readers need to know these are two different machines.

Re: "O"ops!

elliott on 8/06/02 at 10:44 (091736)

Thanks for the correction. Baby 'O' is how I used to call this one. But my point was that I'm not sure what Kay's posting is doing in this thread; we're talking about the Dornier Epos, a machine Dr. Z claims is far superior to the Ossatron.

--

Re: "O"ops!

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/06/02 at 11:38 (091739)

Since you brought out my statement concerning why I think the dornier is superior to the ossatron here is my opinion

1. Sparkgap Technology was invented by dornier and they don't use it now.
2. Inline ultrasound shows you where to target the area at the insertion.
3. EMSE is more efficient with production and rate per minute of shockwaves
4. With the ossatron due to lack of inline ultrasound you have to go from the bottom and therefore have to have IV sedation and or general anesthesia.
5. Dornier has much more experience in both the EWSL and the ESWT market, world wide.

Thats all I can think for now.

Re: Dr. Z

Pauline on 8/06/02 at 15:44 (091759)

Was the information compiled into a single report? Who has it now?

Re: Yes, I've been cured......

JudyS on 8/07/02 at 15:37 (091873)

I had two treatments last year. The second was very nearly one year ago. I feel that one foot is completely cured. I feel that the other still has occasional morning or stiffness insertion soreness at about a level of one or two and I may see about one more zap on that foot. I haven't decided yet.

I feel that my ESWT with Dr. Z, provided, at the very least, an environment in which my feet could then respond well to standard, consistent treatments such as stretching, ibuprofen, strengthening. Without the ESWT, I feel that I was doomed to either surgery or more crippling scarring. We all always knew that the ESWT, or even surgery , had to be followed with proper foot care - shoes, strengthening, stretching, etc. If I recall my ESWT education correctly, the purpose of it, on a very chronic condition, is to provide a means by which healing blood flow could 'get to' the scarred, inflamed tissue. Then it's up to the sufferer to work at footwear, strengthening, etc. and to keep inflammation down as opposed to going out and reinjuring all over again.

Yes, I think it has worked well for me.

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

kay on 8/07/02 at 16:07 (091878)

two different machines but don't they work the same? isn't the difference's between them very small?
kat

Re: that's the big "O", not the big "E"

kay on 8/07/02 at 16:12 (091879)

i guess i should read the rest of the thread before i post. judy it is nice to hear someone is having a positive response to the eswt. heck its nice to hear something positive from anything.
maybe by the time i am ready to do something with my other foot it will be closer to me and paid for by my insurance.
i have aetna....does anyone know if they are looking at it again?
kay

Re: Dr. Z

Dr. Zuckerman on 8/08/02 at 15:14 (091992)

It is a the form of a summary. Dornier has the information. I have the graph

Re: To Ron P from Dr Kiper-"miracle product"

Rebecca C on 8/24/02 at 22:33 (093443)

Please tell me what is this miracle cure? Do you have a web site?