Microbiome in Multiple Sclerosis; Where Are We, What We Know and Do Not Know : Boziki et al Apr 2020

full paper:
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3425/10/4/234/htm

 

I was curious, looking at Norway:

4-10x increase is just massive. But so many questions about whether this is an actual increase, or better diagnosis? Because diagnosing MS in 1961 was definitely not in the excellent range anywhere in the world. And even to this day, largely because of psychosomatics, many MS cases end up misdiagnosed because they are not textbook cases.

However I am all for environmental medicine to take its proper place and shove psychosomatics down the memory hole. It's so weird that for the most part in comparing both, psychosomatics is the mainstream "serious" thing while environmental medicine is typically treated as fringe and mostly woo. Completely backwards, though right in line with the typical human need to maximally commit to the wrong path way past the point at which it is reasonable before finally agreeing to follow the obvious right path, the one that does not involve magic and instead requires hard work that makes baseless speculation impossible.

 

I started going to an MS therapy centre in 1994 just as MRIs were being used for diagnosis. They were not routine and very expensive, though a few people got one privately.

Before that the diagnosis was clinical and "possible MS", "probable MS", and "definite MS" You were only told when it was definite so people with MS were very disabled.

In the past few years the people coming have been very young and not very disabled at all. What is happening is that MRIs are now given at the first sign of anything neurological so diagnosis is made very early.

There may be an actual increase, especially if vit D is involved, but early diagnosis must be a big factor.