Side Effects of Prescription and OTC Drugs

Side effect scares and recalls have left many of us questioning the safety of many prescription and OTC drugs. Now, reporting in the New York Times reveals that a major pharmaceutical company was behind scientific reviews that misrepresented the dangers of hormone replacement therapy (HRT)--and boosted sales.

Wyeth paid ghostwriters to promote its products in 26 journal articles that emphasized benefits and de-emphasized risks. Physicians were credited as authors.

Although this company has since improved transparency regarding published studies, the practice appears to be widespread.... --Remedies for Life, October 2009.

Suzanne

Oh yes, the battle to sell medicines, every more medicines, to the detriment of a few. We're used to a few dying by the wayside, or are we, the general public, generally apathetic? Seems the tide is turning, if you avoid the propaganda from the mainstream news outlets. Not sure even the NY Times is really that good, either, but it says something....

Side Effects of Popular Prescription Drugs

Elsa, a 70 year old woman who lives alone and chops her own wood feared she had intruders one winter morning when she found wood for her stove all split and scattered about her porch. Some time later she discovered a plate of partially eaten food in her kitchen. Ready to call the police, she stopped when she realized that the tracks in the snow were made by her own boots, yet she had no recollection of making them.

Doctors, who assured her that her tests were negative, suggested that her memory lapse might be due to Lipitor, the statin drug she had started taking to lower her cholesterol. She stopped its use and bounced back to her usual alert self.

There are many more reports similar to Elsa's story. Indeed, there are thousands who experience episodes of transient global amnesia after taking Lipitor and are unaware of this lesser-known side effect of the most prescribed drug in America. Many times the cognitive disturbances caused by statin drugs, including disorientation, confusion and unusual forgetfulness, often go unreported. Or if they are reported are freguently dismissed by doctors as normal symptoms of aging. --adapted from Let's Live, November 2004.

Comment: There are various dietary and lifestyle factors that can be implemented to lower cholesterol without resorting the these suspect drugs.

Suzanne

Adverse Effects of Osteoporosis Meds

Widely used osteoporosis drugs-prescribed since the 1990s--are being linked to previously unsuspected causes of serious heart problems, researchers have discovered. Drugs such as Boniva, Fosomax, Reclast and Actonel may cause serious heart rhythm problems, which increase the risk for stroke and heart attack.

The drugs contain bisphosphonates, which a research team from Wake Forest University School of Medicine has pinpointed as the cause of the heart problems. The researchers made the discovery after they tracked the health records of 13,000 patients who were compared with a further 13,000 people who were given a placebo. --Drug Safety, 2009; 32:219-28.

Suzanne

This might be as per the thread title, but it's on topic for the manner in which "scientific" articles are published.

Back a few years ago, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published an article on hair-mineral analysis (HMA) tests. I was stunned to see the article pawned off as "scientific," when science it was not. (At least, it was not "good" science!)

The following is but an abstract of it. I guess you can pay something to read the full article from JAMA online. I didn't do that.

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/285/1/67

Their research was fundamentally flawed in several areas:
1) The sample size was only ONE SINGLE PERSON.
2) There are many variables in a person's hair minerals, based mostly on time. Older hair may have a different composition than the fresher portion, including the factors of changes in body chemistry over time, changes in environment, exposure to the elements, and exposure to pollutants and contaminants which would spoil the sample.
3) No research was conducted, at all, on same-lab consistency between equivalent samples.

Each lab has its own unique system for presenting the results of the test. Some labs have greater precision in parts per million (PPM). Some labs do not give the information in numerical form, but rather in graph form. Some labs use a percentage of "normal" instead. However, each lab is likely consistent with itself between two equivalent samples, such that as long as you use the same lab each time, you have a meaningful comparison of data. This was not, however, included in the study--no data on intra-lab consistency was gathered.

The abstract linked above does not include this, but I read the actual article some years back, so I'll fill in some detail from memory. The single-person sample used for the laboratory comparison test was a lady with long hair. Her hair was cut and sent out to the various labs. However, there was nothing in the article to indicate exactly how this was done, or whether or not the hair could have been evenly mixed around so that each sample was as nearly equal as possible. Lacking this information, it is easy to assume that each sample was taken from a different portion of the hair--and this could easily affect the outcome.

To be done right, they should have tested a known quantity. For example, it is possible to send paper, cotton, etc. to the labs for testing--and they could have dipped sterile cotton balls into a solution of some form, dried them uniformly, and sent them instead. But this they did not do.

If the research had supported the labs, big pharma would simply choose not to have it published. There are many unpublished studies, just because they did not support the product(s) of the study's backer(s).

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Pain Killer Warning for Women

Scary News: Johns Hopkins University reports that deaths from prescription painkiller poisoning more than tripled among women ages 45 to 64 in a recent 6-year period. Before you use hydrocodone (Vicodin) or acetaminophen and codeine combos, talk to your health care provider about overdose risks and the dangers of drug interactions and taking more than one med at a time. --Health, Nov. 2009.

Suzanne

But their conclusion was that laboratories differed in analyzing that single person. What more would a larger sample size show if they failed in one comparison? Now, if the data from the labs showed favorable comparisons, I agree, it would not give adequate information on the quality of the labs. But, since they can't get one right, is there a need to test further?

Sending a sample multiple times would be beneficial in showing how bad the labs were, but again, if they can't get one right, is there any need to show how bad they are once it is shown they are inadequate?

Now, if their purpose was to show which was the best lab, then maybe multiple testing would be in order. I don't understand that as their purpose, but more of a general recommendation. That would be more of a Consumer Reports research rather than assessing reliability of commercial labs. It does say, if improved, so the previous research would be needed, but if I'm reading it right, 10 times off, is still way off and nothing further needs to be done.

Interesting in a cited by article which linked autism with disability to eliminate mercury and how hair analysis did not indicate with mercury exposure due to some people's elimination problems. Wonder if they used different labs?
http://ijt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/22/4/277

kland,

Perhaps I did not explain myself well, because you missed half of my point. They sent a different sample of hair to each lab, and then expected the same results?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

It takes a toxicologist to explain this intelligently, which I am not. However, I just recommended a lady with cancer see a toxicologist this week, and I am somewhat familiar with their science.

Hair will rarely have mercury. Mercury is fat-soluble, not water soluble, and as such it does not tend to show up in the hair, except by external contamination (exposure to smoke from fossil fuels, etc.). What the hair WILL do is show a pattern of minerals which can indicate whether or not mercury is present. The body has a complex balance of minerals, in which too much of one may affect the levels of another. There are many cooperating pairs.

For example: zinc and copper are a pair. If you drink water from copper pipes, you are getting more than the "natural" amount of copper in your diet. This means, among other things, that your body will try to flush the excess copper, which shows up in the hair. Along with the copper, since zinc is treated much the same as copper in the body, zinc gets flushed too. This means that those drinking from copper plumbing tend to be zinc deficient. Zinc supplementation may be recommended in this case, to offset the higher-than-normal copper intake.

People who are anti-supplements should necessarily be just as much against such things as copper pipes which upset the delicate natural balance of minerals in the body. Of course, it is much easier to take some zinc than to change all of your pipes to granite aquifers.

In the case of mercury, high levels of mercury may cause the body to flush another element instead, while vainly trying to rid itself of the mercury. Here's a short statement regarding mercury in the hair that I found online:


Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I see your point, but kind of hard to send the same sample. Also, would you think hair near the scalp would vary 10 times on the same individual?