The debate regarding funding in Canada has been considered to be specially informative as an example of extreme involvement of politics, due to public pressure, in decisions usually governed by scientific evidence.In 2009, the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada committed to funding research on the connection between CCSVI and MS, although later in 2010 it came under criticism for opposing clinical trials of CCSVI therapy. The MS Society of Canada in September 2010 reserved one million dollars toward CCSVI research "when a therapeutic trial is warranted and approved. "At a political level there have been contradictory positions, with some provinces funding trials, others stating that since therapy is unproven they should wait, and others urging for a pan-Canadian trial. British Columbia, Alberta, and Newfoundland and Labrador funded observational studies in which patients who had already received the treatment were included. Over 2 million dollars were allocated to these studies. The province of Saskatchewan was more aggressive and provided 2.2 million dollars for some of its residents to be included in a clinical trial.The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the federal agency responsible for funding health research, recommended in 2010 against funding a pan-Canadian trial of liberation therapy because there was a lack of evidence on the safety or efficacy of the procedure. It suggested a scientific expert working group made up of the principal investigators for the seven MS Society-sponsored studies. The health minister accepted the CIHR recommendation and said that Canada was not going to fund clinical trials.
Patients reasons for not publishing negative results may include embarrassment about the money spent in the procedure without effect and the negative reaction they expect from other people with MS. Caution has been recommended regarding patients self-reports found on the web.Scientists and physicians transmitted their arguments regarding CCSVI inadequately, especially after the initial rising of the hypothesis. Their communication was characterized by an excessive hesitation and a lack of clear statements, as opposed to CCSVI proponents, who "won the communication battle, at least in the early rounds." A positive effect of the important media coverage may be that it forces the world of medical research to be self-critical and give appropriate responses to the questions that globalization of the theory raises, especially among people with MS. Reception in Canada
While reasons are not completely clear, the CCSVI theory was received differently in Canada than other places. The public interest and number of media appearances were much greater than elsewhere, including Italy, and debate has been heated regarding funding. As an example, by the end of 2009, a public petition to the country health authorities in support of the "liberation treatment" had received over 17,000 signatures.