Suzie,

What is your problem? Why so violent? Please go away.

I have asked if one of the frequent posters to this site can offer some solid, hard data to support the many, many claims make that NA causes less, or no, nerve damage than does surgery.

Its a simple that I have every right to ask and so far, there have been no answers others than strong statements about "the French" and Dr. Eaton will show us someday.

Please, to Randy and all others: please show us the proof. Real data. Real science and no stories.

Maybe there is no proof. Now that would be a problem.

Suzie, try to show some maturity. If you suffer from dups as do I, you are likely over 40. Try to act like it.

Perhaps you should look at the facts.
http://assoc.wanadoo.fr/f.badois-dupuytren/html/gbresultats95.html
This is the only complete study I am aware of.

<<<"Can you tell me who the percentage of NA patients who are advanced cases vs. less advanced? I bet you can't.">>>

I'll bet I can. I Interviewed Eaton in person and asked him *very* pointedly what percentage of all the patients that contact him is he able to help with NA. He answered "nearly all". The main problem is scaring from previous Open Surgery, *not* severity of contraction. His office will confirm that he does NA on *all* stages, including stage 4, with fingernails digging into the palm. (Ouch!)

So, to argue that his lack of nerve damage is due to the exclusion of more severe cases has no grounds. There is no reason to assume that his clients present with any less severity than before he stated doing NA.......*except* for this one fact:

NA can be done far *sooner* than OS (20 Vs 45 degrees respectively). From that we could deduce that the *average* contraction he now sees is lower than when he was doing OS for Dups. Arguing that *this* is the reason that his rate of nerve damage is now at Zero only supports the case for making NA the initial form of treatment before resorting to more draconian measures.

Proof? You know very well that, by *definition*, the kind of "proof" you demand will not be available for at least 2-3 more years. Nothing can be published until 5 year rates of recurrence are included. You are demanding to be shown what can't as yet possibly exist, while ignoring or minimizing the excellent data that does. Did you need to see the pictures from Space to believe he Earth was round?

But we digress. The whole point of this debate was my statement that most CHS believe that NA is dangerous, causing nerve damage. Obviously they are quite out to Lunch on this point aren't they.

marjorie: Our friend here isn't really interested in looking at the facts. They don't meet his standards.

I thought the purpose of this chat room was to share experiences with dups and first "hand" knowledge--how it has affected us and how we have dealt with it. I thought this was about helping people with the disease.
It seems that it deteriorates to name calling and snide remarks.

We all know that there is limited data out there about NA.
We should share what we know and/or what we feel and respect each other's opinions.
Each person must decide what is best for them depending on their circumstances.

Randini,

You are a nasty, evil person. You pick fights. Make arguements that did not exist until you created them and then try to take the high road. Wow! Where do you come from?

My question were to bring to light that just saying surgery causes more nerve damage than NA was not valid or based on any real data. I asked you to provide some backup to support your claim and you go the deepend, attach whoever questions you and try to put yourself above the fray you create.

You are a phoney and a fake and I guess, just afraid or unable to admit that you might be wrong. So, again, show the proof or please stop pestering good people with your attitude.