This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

.

WOW, Bob.
Thanks for taking the time to type this up...that would have taken me about three days of hunting and pecking

I especially liked the analogy to the "Lake Wobegon effect" where every drug is deemed "above average" when an industry-sponsored study is utilized. There is so much money involved in big pharma- caveat emptor!

It appears that patients have become the guinea pigs, since drug studies are too small to catch the 1 in 1,000 case of deadly side effects. And the info on statins really scared me. My 75 year old mother stopped taking her statin drug, (with her doc's help) because she felt it was giving her leg pains, and she was having trouble walking. She wanted to control her cholesterol with diet, instead of a drug. Her cholesterol is still fine, she's lost some weight, and she's walking without pain.

There are no magic pills...and we all need to take more personal responsibility for our health.

AC

_________________
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
dual stents placed 5/09
CCSVI in MS

.

Thanks, Bob, for your efforts in sharing this Discover article; it is FILLED with points we all need to consider. MUCH APPRECIATED!!!

good ol pfizer, still out there putting the 'harm' in 'pharmaceuticals'.

.

Thanks for the great article, bob. It is one everyone on statins should read.

Now we need a similar article describing the research and benefits behind MS drugs. I bet it would be a real eye opener.

gwa

.

Bob,

I agree that this article is useful for all types of drugs and diseases. One of the books my mother trusted is "Good Pills, Bad Pills". I remember that many years before Vioxx was pulled, this book and its follow up magazines had really drummed it.

She always wanted to know what I was given for different meds so she could look it up for me.

There are many similarities between the various studies mentioned in your paper, but one that really stands out to me is that like MS trials, only those that are barely into the disease are put into trials so the results look better. For example, SPMS patients are not being offered Revimmune because even though it may stop progression, SPMS patients do not produce dramatic results like early RRMS patients.

Drugs companies are mainly about money and keeping the investors happy (and rich). I have a lot of faith in college research and small company research, which hopefully cater to finding real treatments and cures. Unfortunately, these are the same researchers that have to beg for money to continue working on something which could be a medical breakthrough.

gwa

.

What gets my goat is that when something fails in this way, we are not kept up to date, or no-one is researching or revalidating the conclusion that "cholesterol causes carotid artery plaque". In MS, its the case where some treatment stops the auto-immune effect, but MS still progresses. In these people, it would be opportunistic to validate the current theory.

COB,

If you research plaque build up in arteries, the main culprit is sugar and white starchy worthless foods such as bread, pasta, rice and potatoes.

Eliminating these foods from your diet will help clear out the arteries.

It is more profitable for drug companies to push expensive cholesterol lowering drugs, which are basically worthless, than to promote a better diet.

I was shocked several weeks ago when I watched a news report that pediatricians are prescribing cholesterol lowering drugs now for children. That will give the drug companies about $250 a month (at todays rate) for about 80 years for the typical child on these drugs. The kids in the video were eating fries and battered chicken nuggets, both of which are artery cloggers. We are a nation of food idiots.

gwa

Fab article Bob, thank you for typing it in, that was really taking one for the team!



I think in fact we are also a nation of "all's fair in commercial and market interests.....for the greater good.....so everyone can have research dollars to bring us more of these wonder drugs"

What I find interesting and shocking is that a physician can sit there straight faced and tell you that you have SPMS and that (this or that) approach does not work for SPMS, has (X,y,and z ) side effect, but we should "try" it on the off chance it works for you.

This same doctor will shoot you down immediately if you offer something like antibiotics or Prokarin as a possibility. No, the unproven approach he is offering is sensible, the one you offer is stupid, even though it has far less side effects.

The reason they feel this way is that the sheer volume of stuff wirtten about the "approved approach" including the papers spun up for the marketing department and annual financial report departments of the pharmaceutical company makes it sound great. It's amazing what a billion dollar advertising budget can do for perception..........

Good light on this subject