WHAT DOCTORS DON’T TELL YOU - E-NEWS BROADCAST No. 166 - 23 June 2005

[Guest guest]

" WDDTY e-News " <e-news

WDDTY e-News Broadcast - 23 June 2005

Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:43:16 +0100

 

 

 

WHAT DOCTORS DON'T TELL YOU - E-NEWS BROADCAST No. 166 - 23 June 2005

Please feel free to email this broadcast to any friends you feel would

appreciate receiving it.

 

 

 

NEWS CONTENT

 

 

WHISTLEBLOWERS: Yes, it was the drug companies all along

KEEP ON WALKING: It's the way to survive breast cancer

BREASTFEEDING: It also protects against hypertension

NSAIDS: How about giving them to cancer patients?

DRUGS: Not for pregnant women, but still. . .

 

 

 

WHISTLEBLOWERS: Yes, it was the drug companies all along

 

There's no love lost between the pharmaceutical companies, regulators

suspect. They fear that drug companies may be encouraging doctors to

file reports of adverse reactions to a rival drug.

The practice has been suspected in Poland where drug regulators for

the World Health Organization have noticed an unusually high reporting

on one specific generic psychiatric drug. They fear that doctors have

been encouraged by a rival drug firm to file the reports.

 

Poland's Office of Medicinal Products received more than a hundred

'suspicious' reports of adverse drug reactions from 90 doctors on the

same drug, which represented 29 per cent of all drug reports for last

year. One doctor made six separate reports about the drug.

The regulators reckon the reporting is part of a marketing drive by

the rival firm, although they are still establishing evidence for

their suspicions. The firm in question recently approached the WHO

for a list of drug reactions to the rival drug that had been reported

in Poland.

 

" This kind of underhand dealing for commercial competition is

appalling, " said Prof Ralph Edwards, the director at the WHO centre.

 

For us, it's a bit like Godzilla versus King Kong. We don't care who

wins, but it's amusing to watch the scrap.

(Source: British Medical Journal, 2005; 330: 1287).

 

* The drug companies work in mysterious ways their profits to achieve.

 

 

 

KEEP ON WALKING: It's the way to survive breast cancer

 

A woman is more likely to survive breast cancer if she walks a little

every week, researchers have discovered. Even a few hours of walking

improve a woman's chances of surviving cancer compared with those who

did little or no exercise.

Women who walked three to five hours a week had the lowest risk of

death from breast cancer, and even women who walked more than an hour

a week had a better survival rate than women who did no exercise at all.

Of the 2,987 women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer between

1984 and 1998, 92 per cent were still alive 10 years later if they

walked for three or more hours a week, 89 per cent of those who walked

for one to three hours a week were still alive, while 86 per cent

those who walked less than an hour a week had survived 10 years' since

initial diagnosis.

(Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, 2005; 293:

2479-86).

 

 

 

BREASTFEEDING: It also protects against hypertension

 

Last week we mentioned that breastfeeding our babies was probably not

such a bad idea, especially as those who are introduced to cereals too

early are more likely to develop celiac disease.

Since then we've heard some more good news about breastfeeding (as

though anyone needed convincing). Researchers have found that babies

who are exclusively breastfed are protected from hypertension later in

life. It's so protective that it is equivalent to the elimination of

salt from the diet and exercise in adult life.

This new discovery was made by researchers who have analysed the

health records of 2,000 children participating in the European youth

heart study.

(Source: Archives of Disease in Childhood, 2005; 90: 582-8).

 

 

 

NSAIDS: How about giving them to cancer patients?

 

It's truly wonderful the way that drugs companies can reinvent their

products, even those that are discredited. The most creative example

of this reincarnation (or perhaps we should call it 'lateral

thinking') is the morning sickness pill thalidomide, which caused

horrific deformities in some babies. Today it is being used in

developing countries to treat leprosy.

 

The latest to enjoy the 'repositioning' experience is the family of

NSAIDs (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), and especially the

newer generation of COX-2 drugs.

These painkillers have been suffering a bad press of late, mainly

because they've been linked to an increased risk of heart attack and

stroke. So what should a drug company do in the face of public

pressure? Take the drugs off the market to assuage an attack of

corporate unease? Hell, no, just push them to another group of patients.

 

Latest in line are those poor unfortunates with colon cancer.

Scientists reckon that the NSAID family is just the thing for them.

One study has found that the COX-2 drug celecoxib, marketed as

Celebrex, could reduce the risk of death among these cancer victims.

It's interesting to note that around the exact same time the American

drug regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, was warning doctors

to restrict the use of Celebrex following a study that showed it

increased the risk of death three times.

 

OK, says another group of scientists, how about giving NSAIDs to

smokers? Apparently a Norwegian study has found that the drugs could

reduce the rate of oral cancer among smokers, provided they had been

on the drug for at least six months.

 

Unfortunately the NSAIDs didn't improve the overall survival rate of

smokers. Although there were fewer deaths due to oral cancer, more

were dying from heart problems. In fact, said one of the researchers,

" much to our surprise we ended up with a finding that long-term NSAID

use was associated with a doubling of the risk of cardiovascular death. "

 

Don't these guys ever read the newspapers?

(Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, 2005; 293:

2579-80).