In this environment, it is extremely important for you not to draw any
conclusions from a news summary. Abstracts and headlines do not usually tell the
whole story.
If some medical "breakthrough" is especially important or relevant to you
personally, try to Google the original paper to see whether its conclusions are
preliminary or conclusive; whether there is any dissenting opinion about it from
other qualified investigators in that particular field; whether the research was
conducted on animals and is being extrapolated to humans; and whether the
conclusions reflect an experimental research project.
Look for the risks of potential negative impact of whatever is recommended and
whether there is proper disclosure of conflict of interests by the authors. Were
the findings based on samples that are sufficiently large and representative,
and do the results differ markedly from current concepts? If you know all this,
you can discern whether this "advance" is hype or fact.
If there is any question in your mind about any aspect of the research, consult
your doctor or other professionals in the field before you act on it.
Here's why the foregoing advice is important. In a retrospective analysis of
207 newspaper stories in this country published between 1994 and 1998 about
three drugs - pravastatin, aspirin, and alendronate - 53% of them made no
mention of potential side effects; 70% did not refer to the cost of the drugs (a
very important consideration for many patients); 85 of these papers failed to
admit relevant "industry ties" between the authors and the maker of the product.
One of them reported that in a poll of pregnant women, a majority preferred one
pain reliever to several others. It turns out that the poll was carried out,
paid for, and marketed by the maker of the favored pill!
Here's another important tip. Pay no attention to information written by
anyone who chooses to remain anonymous. You must be able to check the
credentials, affiliations, and other information to determine the credibility of
the person providing this advice. If an article or story does not specifically
identify the person who wrote it, its conclusions should be considered no more
credible than the work of any anonymous blogger or contributor.
I personally endorse several supplements such as omega-3 fatty acid and
CoQ10, both of which are made by several different manufacturers. But I have
never asked for or accepted any payment for doing so, and that includes this
article. I believe that it is very important for people who do not consume
enough oily fish to take omega-3 fatty acid supplements in order to reduce
abnormal blood clotting, lower the risk of sudden cardiac death, perhaps drop
their cholesterol somewhat, and enjoy several other health benefits. I also
believe that supplements of CoQ10 may improve cardiac function and tolerance to
the statin drugs. Both of these products have been studied exhaustively, and
there are some who doubt my opinion about CoQ10. But I'm entitled to present it
based on my own clinical experience. I am also keen on resveratrol supplements,
the substance present in the skin of grapes, that I believe has positive overall
effects on health and longevity. Some of my readers agree with me, others may
not. But at least they know from whom they are getting these opinions.
