Although rheumatoid arthritis drugs (including glucocorticoids, conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and biologic agents) were associated with significant 8% to 58% reductions in the risk of the developing heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular disease in one poorly-controlled international study, there might be other side effects that preclude their widespread use.
Here's just one reason I'd never consider using this therapy to prevent heart disease or stroke.
If that doesn't make your stomach turn, I'd don't know what will...
This is off-topic, but I was wondering what you think about AstraZeneca's "educational" website on atherosclerosis.
Not that atherosclerosis isn't a serious thing, but I suspect their main purpose is to raise public awareness of what it is so they can sell more rosuvastatin.
I looked briefly at the site. At least their "Mission Statement" page identifies that AstraZeneca sponsors the site. As such, at least it's more transparent than many other drug company-sponsored sites.
I also looked at their "Questions to Ask Your Doctor" and I guess I would say I would have no other time to answer any other questions if I answered all of those posed in their questionaire.
Finally, the coined term "athero" bugs me - especially since it's nothing more than a marketing department "dumbing down" a theoretically informational website (kind of defeats the purpose, right?).
Hey, wonder why they didn't mention RA drugs on their site to fight "athero?" (Just trying to get back on topic...)
there's also the possibility of increased cancer risk, as they're constantly going back and forth on with the etanercept/infliximab.
Interesting -- if you type "athero" into Google, Google reads it as "atherosclerosis."
Post a Comment