October 18, 2004
Docs and Cholesterol
During August and September, the Center for Science in the Public Interest organized a joint letter from 35 physicians and scientists questioning the accuracy and objectivity of the latest cholesterol guidelines from the National Institutes of Health. Eight of nine scientists on the NIH panel were paid consultants for drug companies that made statins, which lower cholesterol.
CSPI, where I direct the Integrity in Science project, still hasn't received an official response. But the quotes in a major Associated Press story which ran over the weekend suggest that NIH will not follow through on the request for NIH to appoint a non-conflicted panel to reevaluate the evidence and, if warranted, publish new guidelines.
The original letter pointed out there was no evidence to suggest middle-aged women with slightly elevated cholesterol levels will benefit from these drugs. Moreover, at least one trial in older persons showed statins increased their risk of cancer.
Despite the gap in the evidence, the most recent advertising campaigns by some statin makers have prominently featured middle-aged women. Thousands of seniors are taking these drugs.
In the wake of the Vioxx and anti-depressant controversies, there is a burgeoning movement demanding that drug companies register all clinical trials. The goal is to keep companies from hiding negative data, which almost never gets published and is often withheld from regulatory authorities.
Registering trials is only a first step on the road to reform. The entire system for generating medical information needs overhauling. Drug companies should not be running clinical trials. They should be required to contract with an independent agency to test their new products. And when new evidence gets generated, physicians who are completely free of industry conflicts of interests should write the clinical practice guidelines that other physicians follow.
Patients have the right to know that the treatments they are receiving are best for their health, not best for somebody else's bottom line.
Posted by gooznews at October 18, 2004 11:59 AMI support any stap that can get the most secretive U. S. government since Quincy Adams to reveal information citizens need to judge how well their government is serving them--compared with how well it is serving those who exploit them. I endorse the suggestion that all clinical trials be registered.
I would also make sure that the registry is available easily to all interested citizens. I suggest that the registry be posted on the internet, and that it also be available to any citizen who sends a SASE to NIH asking for a dated list of current clinical trials.