Letters to the Editor
nancyh
Published Letters: 159 Editor's Choice: 5
-
Here come the consipiricy theorists
[Read the article: Brain scam]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Alternative medicine does offer promising treatments for many things, but the Medical Establishment often makes it next to impossible to do the kind of studies on them that would provide conclusive evidence of validity. Most of what Dr. Amen is promoting has indications of having potential."
Bullshit. The National Institute of Health has a specific funding source for researchers interested in testing alternative and complimentary medical treatments. See link
http://nccam.nih.gov/
Is it underfunded and highly competitive: YES. But, so is the rest of NIH.
The purpose of NCCAM is to fund studies that would provide "conclusive evidence of validity" for alternative and complimentary treatments. Unfortunately, a number of herbal remedies have been shown to be minimally effective.
"Studies suggest that St. John's wort is of minimal benefit in treating major depression. A study cofunded by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) found that St. John's wort was no more effective than placebo in treating major depression of moderate severity. There is some scientific evidence that St. John's wort is useful for milder forms of depression."
-
rupert_c
[Read the article: Brain scam]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ok. Before we proceed. It is important that you are aware that there are essentially two vehicle's for funding medical research. #1 Industry generated research #2 Big Gvt research (i.e., NIH, NIAMS).
For some unfathomable reason, the FDA thinks it is ok to let drug companies test their own products, or at least fund the testing of their own products. That is the process by which we get drugs like Prozac, Viagra etc. It is also the process that ensures that the vast majority of time, if company X is funding a study, company X's product will outperform the placebo and company Y's product. If company Y is funding the study-wash, rinse, repeat.
Drug companies have a HUGE amount of money to throw around and so the vast majority of products that are out there come out via this route-for better and often for worse.
In contrast, the Federal gvt provides money to fund independent researchers to test the effectiveness/efficacy of various drugs, treatments etc. This process is very expensive, woefully underfunded, takes a researcher an average of 4 tries to get funded, and could be considered quite wasteful. However, it has produced important information about the long term effects of drugs (i.e., studies showing Estrogen Replacement Therapy not only doesn't prevent Heart Disease, it is likely to be dangerous for older women; another study showing that older cheaper antihypertinsive meds were more effective than newer, more expensive drugs).
Drug companies don't suppress other forms of research, they just outspend it.
You want better medications/treatments, call your congressman and demand better funding for investigator initiated research and demand an end to a system by which drug companies get to vet their own products.
-
sense of humor
[Read the article: "SNL" spoofs Hillary: "I am a sore loser"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Now, if they had a sketch with Obama walking on water and healing the sick, that would be friggin awesome. Or better yet, Obama as like a super hero who uses his powers to brainwash the crowd...creating Obamatons!"
AWESOME!
SNL Dan Ackroyd (Ronco Bag of Glass), Jane Curtain (Dan and Jayne -point counterpoint "Jane you ignroant slut" "Dan you male chauvenist pompous windbag"), Father Guido Sarducci (Find the Pope in the Pizza) John Belucci (Killer Bees, Samari whatever), Bill Murray (Tod and Lisa Lupner), Gilda Radner (Rosanne Rosanna Danna, Miss Emily Latella), Chevy Chase (Landshark), Garrett Morris (a public service announcement for the hearing impaired), Loraine Newman et al. (the Coneheads). This stuff was just funny!
-
@ Devizier
[Read the article: Brain scam]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First things first. As you say, FDA's reliance on Pharma to test their own products is consistent with a free market system. However, it is an example of how the free market is bad, bad, bad, for health.
Your comments on the results of the long term studies on Estrogen Replacement Therapy (ERT) and Antihypertensives seemed to indicate that you thought that these were "duh" findings. On the contrary, the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) changed medical practice. Prior to the WHI, there was a huge movement afoot to prescribe ERT to a huge number of women for a wide range of perceived benefits and over a long period of time. The WHI shut that down and in aggregate probably saved a thousand or so lives and millions of dollars. The fact that there has been a reevaluation of some of the findings is a further example of how science self-corrects.
I don't know the Antihypertensive study data, so I can't comment on the quality of that study, but I do know that the data were used to create a cost savings for consumers. Real science, that which is untainted by industry $$$, produces better and usually more conservative results.