Monday's [Oct 11] CBS Evening News ~ Statins

[ty123]

Hunter44 said, "If the studies show that a drug [in this case Advicor] is effecient at reducing or preventing heart disease/heart attacks, wouldn't the company marketing the drug want to state that?"

Yes they would, but the rules are, you can't say it if it isn't true, and it isn't true if there's nothing to back it up. That rule is specific to medicine. Now, in the case of something dietary you can make fantastical claims.

Take Cortaslim for example. Its a mix of herbs, its dietary, and can therefore claim to help you lose weight. It is more likely to help you lose money...and of course if its in coinage the weight loss will be real enough.

Other products can claim to regrow hair. They don't, but they can claim it. Its marketing. Marketing = BS. Some marketing has a grain of truth, some has none. Science will have some truth, and sometimes a grain of marketing.

Advicor hasn't been specifically studied to show a reduction in heart disease, so even though it does what all statins do, it hasn't shown specific efficacy as Atorvastatin has.

Is it likely to have the same efficacy? Actually no, it may have more, or it may have less because its not exactly the same thing.

Ironically, Lipitor's recent proofs were made by a competitor in a study called PROVE IT meant to show the efficacy of Pravachol. What it showed is that Pravachol is a weak sister compared to Lipitor. Not what they were looking to show, and also a black eye for those who see conspiracy in all the drug companies do.

[traveler47]

Originally Posted by ty123

Ironically, Lipitor's recent proofs were made by a competitor in a study called PROVE IT meant to show the efficacy of Pravachol. What it showed is that Pravachol is a weak sister compared to Lipitor. Not what they were looking to show, and also a black eye for those who see conspiracy in all the drug companies do.

google 'PROVE IT lipitor'

Excerpts from article at the top of the list.

The participants had been randomly assigned to take either a higher than normal dose of Lipitor (80 mg) or the standard 40 mg dose of Pravachol each day.
[Isn't this comparing apples to oranges?]

The Prove It results would be exciting if we had the full picture on high-dose Lipitor. As is often the case, the serious adverse effects experienced by the study participants taking Lipitor were not reported.
[Not reporting side effects is becoming the norm for trials]

90% of participants were white and the rest were not specified. This leaves an information gap for everyone else.
[Usually trials are done with a diverse group]

Judging from the media reports of Prove It trial, many cardiologists seem poised to extend its results to people without heart disease.
[Now why would a doctor prescribe statins for someone without heart disease? This is just insane]

Interestingly, the new results have revived an old controversy about whether the benefits of statins are due to their cholesterol lowering, anti-inflammatory or some other effects.
[You'd think with all the trials to date, they would have some clue]

April, 2004

So what exactly did PROVE IT prove?

[zip2play]

"What did PROVE IT prove?"

The study, called PROVE IT, for Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy, was based at Brigham and Women's Hospital, a Harvard affiliate in Boston. And for several reasons the results involved major surprises.

The sponsor of the research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, maker of Pravachol, expected to prove that this drug is just as good as its more potent rival Lipitor, made by Pfizer. "We were as surprised by the findings as the sponsor," Braunwald notes. "To their great credit, the company was totally supportive in our making the results public soon after they were available."

The surprises extend to the roots of basic research and to the practices of doctors worldwide. "There was a common belief that once you lower harmful low-density cholesterol to 100 milligrams per deciliter, you achieve little further gain by going any lower," Braunwald points out. "Certainly, that's what I believed. But those who took the high-dose statin reached a level of about 62, and over two and a half years these people enjoyed a 16 percent lower risk of heart attacks, stroke, bypass surgery, rehospitalization for cardiac events, and death from all causes."

[heart44]

Originally Posted by zip2play

"What did PROVE IT prove?"

I guess my point was that side effects were under-reported, especially in view of the fact that 80mg of Lipitor seems excessive. It might have lowered LDL, but at what cost [not monitary] to the participants.