December 1st, 2011 by John Mandrola, M.D. in Health Tips, Research
1 Comment »
There was important news this month on statin drugs. As one of the world’s most effective and commonly used medications, statins provide great writing topics. Lots of people have high cholesterol–including cyclists. Lots of people are interested in avoiding our mostly deadly disease.
I’d like to tell you about a recently-published (Lancet) landmark study that should quell safety concerns over statin drugs.
The punch line after I tell you the study’s results are short and sweet. Scroll down if you wish. But first, statin drugs are misunderstood enough to warrant a little blog-like simplicity. Let’s start with some background.
A brief statin review:
Statin drugs are best known for their cholesterol-lowering properties. The notion is simple: Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Dr John M*
October 8th, 2011 by John Mandrola, M.D. in Health Tips, Opinion
No Comments »
I recently wrote about the incredible sensations that come with vigorous exercise. Perhaps it was the post ride cannabinoid flurry, but it’s possible that I went too far in suggesting that ‘we’ (doctors, patients, the whole of Western Society) default first to pills before healthy living.
Two commentors called me out on this snark. They wrote about valid points.
One comment focused on the fact that her AF medicines were causing side effects that made vigorous exercise difficult. The second objected to my inference that exercise alone could substitute for the many benefits of modern medicine.
To the idea that medicine Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Dr John M*
September 4th, 2011 by John Mandrola, M.D. in Opinion
1 Comment »
The tweet said that experts were debating the merits of a polypill? I had to click that link.
Yes. I was right; there were actually “eminent” cardiologists suggesting that a pill containing 4 different medicines (a statin, aspirin, beta-blocker and an ACE-inhibitor) “might change the face of cardiovascular medicine.”
The direct quote from Dr. Salim Yusef, one of the most eminent heart doctors, went like this:
“We have to think of the polypill not as a pill, but as part of a strategy to completely change our approach to prevention,” said Yusuf. “Instead of saying lifestyle first and drugs next, why don’t we say that drugs are the basis, then get the patients contemplating prevention, and then get them to modify their lifestyle. Maybe that will work, because the reverse strategy hasn’t.”
Maybe it was jet lag? Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Dr John M*
January 20th, 2011 by Harriet Hall, M.D. in Better Health Network, Opinion
3 Comments »
A November letter to the editor in American Family Physician chastises that publication for misusing the term “secondary prevention,” even using it in the title of an article that was actually about tertiary prevention.
I am guilty of the same sin. I had been influenced by simplistic explanations that distinguished only two kinds of prevention: Primary and secondary. I thought primary prevention was for those who didn’t yet have a disease, and secondary prevention was for those who already had the disease, to prevent recurrence or exacerbation. For example, vaccinations would be primary prevention and treatment of risk factors to prevent a second myocardial infarct would be secondary prevention.
No, there are three kinds of prevention: Primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary prevention aims to prevent disease from developing in the first place. Secondary prevention aims to detect and treat disease that has not yet become symptomatic. Tertiary prevention is directed at those who already have symptomatic disease, in an attempt to prevent further deterioration, recurrent symptoms and subsequent events.
Some have suggested a fourth kind, quaternary prevention, to describe “… the set of health activities that mitigate or avoid the consequences of unnecessary or excessive interventions in the health system.” Another version is “Action taken to identify patient at risk of overmedicalisation, to protect him from new medical invasion, and to suggest to him interventions, which are ethically acceptable.” But this is not a generally accepted category. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Science-Based Medicine*
