Is there scientific evidence to support new recommendations that millions of Americans should consider taking statin drugs to reduce their risk of cardiovascular disease?
The Center for Science in the Public Interest was joined by 3 dozen physicians, epidemiologists and other scientists in asking for an independent review of statin research. Harvard physician John Abramson said, "The studies do not demonstrate that statins benefit women of any age." Abramson has just written a book entitled, "Overdo$ed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine."
Eight of the nine authors of the July National Institute of Health recommendations for broader use of statins have financial ties to drug companies that make statins.
CSPI says the authors -- and journalists who reported the recommendations -- largely ignored lifetsyle recommendations. CSPI says, "The American people are poorly served when government-sanctioned clinical recommendations, uncritically amplified by the media, misdirect attention and resources to expensive medical therapies that may not be scientifically justified."
Posted by schwitz at September 24, 2004 02:21 PMInterestingly, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's latest guidelines on lowering cholesterol state that patients should try cholesterol-lowering drugs if the cholesterol-lowering diet doesn't work (but this doesn't make for as exciting a news article):
http://nhlbisupport.com/cgi-bin/chd1/step2intro.cgi
Posted by: Maia Dock at September 26, 2004 10:05 AMAre all of these 'mature' news stories suffering from the same old problem? CSPI tells the truth, but is anybody writing or reading?
I just don't think people want to keep reading about prevention, what we "should do" and so the more novel and quick fixes -- and the drugs! -- grab attention.
I also wonder how often a reporter can walk into an editorial meeting and propose a story about prevention. Is sticking to a diet or having safe sex or .... new?
I think we should persist, but it looks like a tough pull.