DAILY ASPIRIN LINKED TO 'WET' AMD

Daily use of aspirin over the long term, as with coumadin, eventually causes the cell wall membrane to fail and bleeding is the end result, and it can be uncontrollable in a large number of cases. 


There are so many safe and effective natural supplements and remedies that will help with maintaining "thinned" blood it is puzzling why people subject themselves to these risks.

 "Regular aspirin users at higher risk of sight problems, research suggests" Martin Evans, The Telegraph, 10/3/11, telegraph.co. uk 

Study after study has shown that daily aspirin use increases the risk of intestinal bleeding and a potentially fatal haemorrhage. Also, a recent study showed some disturbing news for anyone who values their eyesight.

 Dutch researchers examined more than 4,000 elderly patients. Among these patients, 840 took a daily low-dose aspirin. When the researchers compared records, they found that those who used aspirin were TWO TIMES more likely to develop "wet" advanced macular degeneration (AMD) - the advanced form of the disease that sharply increases risk of blindness. 

This does not prove that aspirin promotes wet AMD... but there is a significant link and a very alarming risk that should be taken seriously.

Researchers continued to say that the heart health benefits of aspirin outweigh the AMD risks.

But in a 2005 New England Journal of Medicine study, some 20,000 middle-aged women took 100mg of aspirin daily for 10 years. Another group of nearly the same size took a placebo.

Results showed that aspirin provided no protection from heart attack, but did slightly reduce risk of ischemic stroke. 

Meanwhile, women in the aspirin group were found to have a 40% increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding severe enough to require transfusions!

Add to that wet AMD and this "wonder drug" may not be worth the risk. 

Calcium and Bone Health

UPDATE: 4 August - NattoPharma says calcium research highlights vitamin K role

By NUTRA staff reporter, 04-Aug-2010

Related topics: Research, Minerals, Vitamins & premixes, Bone & joint health, Cardiovascular health

Norwegian vitamin K supplier NattoPharma has backed the role of vitamin K in calcium metabolism following the controversial British Medical Journal meta-analysis linking calcium consumption and increased risk of heart attack.

The article has drawn widespread industry criticism for inappropriately “cherry picking” data, but NattoPharma says regardless of that fact, the research highlights the importance of vitamins D and K in the way the body processes calcium.

“Vitamin D helps the body absorb calcium and vitamin K2 activates the proteins responsible for directing the calcium to the bone where we want it and out of the arteries where it can have detrimental negative effects,” said NattoPharma chief executive officer, Morten Sundstø.

The company referenced vitamin K researcher, Professor Cees Vermeer, who backed observations made by two of the researchers that, “the only mechanism for arteries to protect themselves from calcification is via the vitamin K‐dependent protein MGP.”

“MGP is the most powerful inhibitor of soft tissue calcification presently known, but non‐supplemented healthy adults are insufficient in vitamin K to a level that 30 per cent of their MGP is synthesised in an inactive form. So protection against cardiovascular calcification is only 70 per cent in the young, healthy population, and this figure decreases at increasing age.”

NutraIngredients coverage of the calcium research that found the risk of vascular calcium deposits causing heart attack outweighed potential bone healthbenefits can be found here.

Sundstø noted the western diet was something like 30 per cent deficient in vitamin K2 which could extenuate calcium deposits, especially among over-50s who commonly use calcium supplements to ease osteoporosis.

Vermeer added: “Obviously, an increased calcium load (by taking calcium supplements) will be beneficial for bone strength, but at the same time it will worsen the situation for the vasculature.”

from 30 July, 2010 -  One part of this equation seems to be overlooked and that is the type of calcium supplement and the amount of calcium supplementation. 

Too often I find that people do not want to spend money for supplements and look for the most inexpensive product rather than a high quality product that will fare them better in the long run.

Numerous studies have been completed that clearly establish the lack of benefit from mas market supplements made with the lowest grade, and most often least effective ingredients.

Calcium carbonate is just one of these ingredients, and its also the main core found in TUMS.

For many not well apprised of the best ways to utilize supplements, TUMS is one of those often suggested by doctors to help bones.  Those same doctors are quick to forget that all this calcium overload add a negative effect to the blood buffering system.  You know, the buffering system that keeps your blood pH in normal range.

Often this form of calcium can lead to bone spurs and calcium deposits basically because your body just can't metabolize it effectively.  We've got better options for you to consider.

And I guess no one told the same doctors that BonAmi, my favorite commercial scouring powder, is made from the very same form of calcium -carbonate!

Calcium pills 'increase' risk of heart attack

By Emma Wilkinson Health reporter, BBC News

Calcium supplements taken by many older people could be increasing their risk of a heart attack, research shows.

The study, in the British Medical Journal, said people who took supplements were 30% more likely to have a heart attack.
Data from 11 trials also suggested the medicines were not very effective at preventing bone fractures.
Almost 3m people in the UK are thought to have osteoporosis and many take calcium pills to prevent fractures.
The study recommends doctors review their use of calcium supplements for managing osteoporosis.
The National Osteoporosis Society said most people should be able to get enough calcium through their diets, rather than reaching for the medicine cabinet.
The researchers said those who had a diet naturally high in calcium were at no increased danger.
'Limited benefit'In all 12,000 people aged over 40 took part in the trials of calcium supplements of 500mg or more a day.

It is a balance of risks - people should consider the risks involved and how they apply to their own circumstances and discuss the matter with their GP” Dr Alison Avenell Study author

The risk of heart attack was seen across men and women, was independent of age and the type of supplement given.
A small increased risk of death was seen in the study but was not statistically significant, the researchers said.
The reason for the increased risk of heart attack is not clear but it is thought the extra calcium circulating in the blood could lead to a hardening of the arteries.
Calcium in the diet is safe and the Food Standards Agency recommends adults have 700mg of calcium a day from milk, cheese and green, leafy vegetables.
Dr Alison Avenell, from the University of Aberdeen which did the research with colleagues in New Zealand and the US, said the evidence suggests calcium supplements only have a limited benefit in preventing fractures, especially when compared to other treatments available.
"It is a balance of risks - people should consider the risks involved and how they apply to their own circumstances and discuss the matter with their GP," she said.
She added the results did not necessarily apply to younger people with conditions for which they take calcium.
Judy O'Sullivan, senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said the results should be interpreted with caution because the trials did not set out to look at the risk of heart attack.
"However, the research should not be completely ignored," she said.
"Any new guidelines on the prevention of fractures in those most vulnerable to them should take this type of analysis into account."
Dr Claire Bowring, of the National Osteoporosis Society, said: "We've always recommended that people should aim to get the calcium they need from their diet to help build stronger bones.
"If you get all of the calcium that you need from your diet and adequate vitamin D from exposure to sunshine, then a supplement will not be necessary."
She said there were still questions to be answered about the treatment of osteoporosis but advised people taking calcium supplements to talk to their GP, especially if they have a heart condition.

Sampling from Natural Health News 30+ posts about Bone Health

Natural Health News: Bone Health and AntiAcid Drugs

May 26, 2010

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Tuesday that studies suggest a possible increased risk of bone fractures with the use of proton pump inhibitors for one year or longer, or at high doses. Package insert labels for the drugs ...

Natural Health News: Avandia Increases Bone Risk for Women

Dec 10, 2008

Dr Victoria King, of the charity Diabetes UK, said: "We really do need further evidence through properly controlled trials before we can conclusively link thiazolidinediones to increased risk of various bone conditions in humans and ...

Natural Health News: Osteoporosis drug Forteo linked with bone cancer

Oct 02, 2009

A few points to consider - DpD only indicates current bone loss. There are so many factors regarding bone loss - including; those who never gained peak bone mass for multiple reasons - eating disorders or simply not eating well during ...

Natural Health News: Diane Sawyer, ABC News and FDA very late in ...

Mar 08, 2010

It is very critical that you understand that the bisphosphonate drugs are associated with killing off specific cells that have to do with the complete cycle of bone construction and destruction in the body's natural physiology. ...

Routine aspirin benefit queried

The use of ASA in this context is a risk that should have been known to doctors who are required to study pharmacology and physiology.

Longterm use of ASA and even other blood thinning drugs like coumadin may cause destruction of the cell wall membrane leading to a type of free-radical destruction originating from the rupture of cellular lysosomal membranes. Lysosomes are digestive substances found in each cell. They are designed to digest and eliminate waste from the cell. When the membranes are ruptured prematurely, cell contents are digested and destroyed. Silent bleeding and death may ensue.

Omega 3, garlic, cayenne, willow bark, natto or other natural supplements may do as well or better, and without such a high risk of harm.

Routine aspirin benefits queried
Low-dose aspirin should not routinely be used to prevent heart attacks and strokes, contrary to official guidance, say UK researchers.

Analysis of data from over 100,000 clinical trial participants found the risk of harm largely cancelled out the benefits of taking the drug.

Only those who have already had a heart attack or stroke should be advised to take a daily aspirin, they found.

The Lancet study should help clarify a "confusing" issue, GPs said.

The NHS drugs watchdog, the National Institute for health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), has not made a ruling in this area.

But experts in the UK, US and Europe recommend aspirin for people who have not already had a heart attack or stroke, but are at high risk of cardiovascular disease because of factors such as age, blood pressure and cholesterol level.

“ We don't have good evidence that, for healthy people, the benefits of long-term aspirin exceed the risks by an appropriate margin ”
Professor Colin Baigent, study leader

This strategy, known as primary prevention, is based on the result of studies looking at predicted risks and benefits in this population.

But the latest research provides clearer evidence because it is based on data from individuals, the researchers said.

They looked at heart attacks and strokes and major bleeds - a potential side effect of aspirin - in six primary prevention trials, involving 95,000 people at low to average risk and 16 trials involving 17,000 people at high risk - because they had already had a heart attack or stroke.

Use of aspirin in the lower-risk group was found to reduce non-fatal heart attacks by around a fifth, with no difference in the risk of stroke or deaths from vascular causes.

But it also increased the risk of internal bleeding by around a third.

Balance

However, in those patients who had already had a heart attack or stroke and were at risk of having another, the benefits clearly outweighed the chance of adverse events, the researchers said.

Study leader Professor Colin Baigent from the Clinical Trial Service Unit at the University of Oxford, UK, said drug safety was vital when making recommendations that affected tens of millions of healthy people.

"We don't have good evidence that, for healthy people, the benefits of long-term aspirin exceed the risks by an appropriate margin."

He added: "I think the guideline groups will find it useful to have the data analysed in that way."

Professor Steve Field, chair of the Royal College of GPs, said the issue had been confusing for GPs and patients.

"There is no definitive guidance and it makes it bewildering when you have a series of papers which then hint it would be beneficial to take aspirin."

He added that many patients would buy aspirin over the counter - either on the advice of their GP or under their own steam - because it was cheap.

"This important study does suggest people shouldn't take aspirin unless indicated by disease."

Ellen Mason, senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation said: "It is better for doctors to weigh up the benefit and risk of prescribing aspirin on an individual basis, rather than develop a blanket guideline suggesting everyone at risk of heart disease is routinely given aspirin."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/health/8072215.stm
Published: 2009/05/28 23:11:43 GMT © BBC MMIX

Risks Potentially Outweigh Benefits with Avandia®

Risks Potentially Outweigh Benefits with Diabetes Drug Avandia®

Avandia®, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), was first approved by the FDA in 1999 for marketing on the basis of its ability to lower blood glucose and reduce insulin resistance. By 2006 the drug had become the top selling oral diabetes drug in the United States (13 million prescriptions, approximately 10, 000 daily, for Avandia(R) were filled in the U.S. in 2006).

Avandia®, or rosiglitazone, and a related drug Actos® (pioglitazone), belong to the drug class thiazolidinediones (TZDs). The first drug in this class, Rezulin® (troglitazone), was removed from the market in 2000 for causing liver failure and death.

TZDs have been prescribed alone or used with other hypoglycemic drugs to improve glycemic control in diabetic patients. Initially the long term effects of the drug, such as cardiovascular events, were unknown.

According to a story published in The New York Times, Dr. John B. Buse, a diabetes expert and early critic of Avandia®, was “intimidated” by the GSK. As early as 2000, Dr. Buse, closely associated with the American Diabetes Association, charged in a letter to the FDA that Glaxo had used “blatant selective manipulation of data” to overstate the benefits of Avandia® and understate its risks. GSK has denied Dr. Buse’s allegations.

In 2003 several groups and health professionals made an effort to alert the public to the dangerous link between Avandia® and an increased risk of congestive heart failure. In late 2006 the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) published a study that illustrated how serious this danger is.

In 2007 Drs. Bruce Psaty of the University of Washington and Curt Furberg of Wake Forest University, in the New England Journal of Medicine, said that “to the extent that the new analysis shows valid risks”, the drug "represents a major failure of the drug-use and drug-approval processes in the United States".

When the drug was approved, "evidence was at best mixed" on its benefit, wrote the two doctors. Both have criticized the FDA's failure to spot dangers in the general drug approval process. Other experts have expressed concern that Avandia® is another example of the FDA failing to detect safety problems early enough.

Because TZDs can cause fluid retention, Avandia® is not recommended for patients with symptomatic heart failure. So, in 2007 the FDA did request that both Avandia® and Actos® carry a stronger “black box” warning against use for people with heart failure.

Finally in late 2008, a working group composed of Public Citizen, the American Diabetes association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, unanimously advised against using Avandia® because of concerns about the drug's risks. They further support immediate action by the FDA to ban the drug because of risks that outweigh benefits along with death from liver failure and life-threatening cardiovascular events.

The FDA’s own Adverse Event Reporting System lists 14 cases of liver failure and 12 deaths associated with Avandia®.

Liver toxicity is a recently identified risk associated with Avandia®. It also increases the risk of Avandia heart attacks by almost 40 percent, doubles the risk of heart failure and bone fractures, and increases the risk of anemia. Visual problems and loss from macular edema, a swelling of the retina caused by fluids accumulating in the eye were increasingly reported with Avandia® (39 times more reports of macular edema per million prescriptions filled).

Dr. Robert Misbin, the FDA official who examined the data on Avandia® at the time of the drug’s approval, found a noticeable increase in the rate of a condition known as congestive heart failure (CHF) in the study participants. And the FDA reports that the drug may have a 30-40 percent greater risk of heart attack and other heart-related adverse events than patients treated with placebo or other anti-diabetic therapy.

Dr. Stephen Nissen of the Cleveland Clinic, wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, that Avandia® showed a disturbing trend toward increasing not only CHF, but heart attack and stroke. The data reviewed in 2007 by Nissen showed the increased risk of CHF to be about 700 percent, and about 50 percent for heart attack and stroke. Death rates increased by 64 percent.

Following on Congressional hearings into the drug’s safety in 2007, when officials asked both the FDA and GSK why Dr. Nissen’s findings were not reported sooner. As a result of these hearings and Nissen’s study, the FDA did begin its own studies, the findings of which are scheduled to be released in 2009. At the same time the agency ordered GSK to issue a public warning about the potential heart-related risks associated with Avandia®.

Associated side effects of Avandia® (rosiglitazone)

Increased weight gain
Diarrhea
Cause or worsen anemia
Increase cholesterol
Deplete chromium, a necessary nutrient for blood sugar regulation and carbohydrate metabolism
Cause water retention
Cause Congestive heart failure, pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, angina, heart attack and stroke
Cause headache and Upper respiratory infection
Cause an increase of injury, especially related with contact sports
Increase risk of hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) and metabolic acidosis when used in combination with other diabetes drugs
Decrease white blood cells
Increase the risk of anemia associated with reduced red blood cells, hemoglobin and hematocrit
Increased levels of total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, and reduced free fatty acids
Increased risk of fracture especially in women using the drug
May increase ovulation in pre-menopausal women (Avandia ® is not to be used by women who are nursing or plan to nurse their infants)
Increased risk of macular edema
May cause nutrient depletion especially when used in combination with other diabetes drugs

Since liver function problems may arise while using this drug for blood sugar control the following information should be considered: Liver enzymes should be measured prior to initiating treatment with AVANDIA®. Therapy with this drug should not be initiated if the patient exhibits clinical evidence of active liver disease or increased levels of ALT (serum transaminase greater than 2.5X the upper limit of normal at start of therapy). After initiation of AVANDIA®, liver enzymes should be monitored periodically by your healthcare professional.

Rosiglitazone is predominantly metabolized by Cytochrome P450 (CYP) detox pathway in the liver (Phase 1). The half-life of the drug may be as long as 153 hours and women show a lower ability to clear the drug.

If, while using this drug you have developed any symptom of liver (hepatic) problems, which may include unexplained nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, fatigue, anorexia (loss of or no appetite) or dark colored urine, contact your health care provider immediately.

It is notable that GSK suggests that if adverse effects occur, when used in combination with other drugs, to cease competing drugs.

A number of Avandia lawsuits have been filed against the manufacturer of Avandia over failure to warn consumers of Avandia side effects .

Should you have questions about using Avandia®, or related medical concerns, contact your health care provider. If you have suffered an injury from taking Avandia and would like to learn about your legal rights, you can find information at www.ConsumerInjuryLawyers.com .

This article is part of a consumer health education series written by Gayle Eversole, DHom, PhD, MH, NP, ND, of Creating Health Institute, in collaboration with Bernstein Liebhard, LLP.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author, Gayle Eversole.