Here's a band wagon to jump on if you just fell off the hay truck
Get ready to be bowled over: A recent study found that Lipitor, a statin drug, can reduce the risk of stroke in patients with no known history of heart disease. A team of researchers tracked over 4,700 patients over a five-year period. These patients had either had a full-blown stroke or a mini-stroke, but did not have heart disease. After their initial stroke, they were randomly chosen to receive either 80 milligrams of Lipitor, which is a maximum dose, or a placebo.
The group of patients who took Lipitor had 16 percent fewer subsequent strokes than the group which received the placebo. The conclusion the researchers drew was that one stroke for every 46 patients treated with Lipitor could be prevented over a five-year period, which means a doctor needs to treat 230 patients with a maximum dose of Lipitor for a year at a cost of around a quarter million dollars to prevent one stroke.
The director of the study doesn't know how many people who are at risk of stroke this would apply to, but estimated up to 40 percent of people who have already had strokes may benefit.
Now, get ready for the amazing part of this study: It was funded by Pfizer. Such perfect timing, coming on the heels of a drop in their market share when the generic versions of Zocor and Pravachol - their main competitors - came on the market. My favorite part of this study had to be when they were unable to vouch for whether competitors' statin drugs could also offer a level of protection against stroke. Seems a little suspicious that Pfizer funded a study that conveniently favors their own statin, Lipitor, that happens to cost so much more than their new, cheaper generic competitors.
Obviously, preventing stroke is important. What you want to look at is whether or not it is a good idea to take Lipitor - or any statin - expressly for stroke prevention. It sounds like grasping-at-straws science, precisely because it is. I mean, look at the side effects of statins, which you've heard me talk about before in a prior House Call: liver damage, dizziness, cognitive impairment, muscle pain and weakness.
What really irritates me is that this study is being spun to both doctors and the public as a positive study by - you guessed it - doctors who are on the Pfizer payroll! Treating over 200 people a year with a drug to prevent just one event means that the drug makes no difference in this matter - stroke prevention - for most people taking the drug. Nearly everyone taking the drug, in fact - over 99.5%. This is expensive, needle-in-the-haystack medicine at its worst. Furthermore, we know there are all sorts of safer not to mention cheaper ways - lifestyle, diet and exercise, for example - that not only confer protection against stroke but provide general health benefits. Shouldn't we be devoting our time, effort and money on those measures, rather than filling the coffers of the drug companies by taking still another drug?
Look, no one wants to suffer a stroke. Better to work on preventing suffering one in the first place. And let's keep our focus on what's safe and what works without bankrupting our health care system.
