Confused? Try our A-Z of conflicting health advice
Jeremy Laurance: A daily aspirin was good for us, then it was dangerous. So when can we trust expert guidance?
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
Painkillers such as Aspirin have obvious benefits, but they can also cause serious damage to the stomach
A-Z guide to conflicting health advice
Every week, it seems a scientific study appears disproving what last week's study showed. Yesterday saw a classic medical volte face: aspirin, which has been prescribed to millions of people over the decades as a protective measure against heart disease, may have more drawbacks than benefits, according to a review in the Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin.
Although a daily aspirin helps prevent a second heart attack or stroke in people who have already had one, in healthy people any protection against cardiovascular disease may be outweighed by an increased risk of internal bleeding, researchers say. Bleeding is a well-known side effect of aspirin and similar drugs that act as irritants to the stomach lining.
After years of headlines about the benefits of aspirin, yesterday's read: "Aspirin is bad for you". In the last couple of weeks, we have also learnt that a father's presence at childbirth is bad for the mother, that drinking three cups of coffee a day protects against liver disease (for people with hepatitis C) and that consuming alcohol cuts a woman's chances of conceiving by IVF. Yet fathers have been encouraged to attend childbirth for decades, coffee has been implicated in umpteen health scares, and alcohol is known to be good for the heart.
Click here to launch our A-Z guide to the ups and downs of medical research
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
I have both, which make me black-out and give me palpitations.
My G.P. just says eat more salty foods and drink less water!
if you are also gaining weight without eating more and experiencing depression like symptoms - ask for a thyroid function test. without these symptoms then the test is pointless.
Secondly - low sodium means either you are drinking too much fluid, now if you are drinking sugary drinks that can cause low blood sugar as a rebound - which explains both symptoms, if not you can either drink a bit less, or eat foods with natural sodium (vegetables, potatoes) or even add a little salt (there are a very small number of people, usually the very health conscious who actually eat too little sodium)
Those two measures will treat low sodium and low blood sugar :)
The biggest danger to our health is journalists - who report this sort of nothing new news with alarmist headlines and half truths.
Surely a large part of the problem isn't that scientists keep changing their minds, but that the media exagerrates scare stories (such as the MMR scare) and reports the often wacky views of self-appointed "experts" - such as health gurus, nutritionists, vitamin supplement pushers etc. - as though they had the same validity as proper scientists and medical specialists. The result is a mass of conflicting stories and advice that leads to public confusion and doubt.
Perhaps if medical journalists tried to understand the scientific process a little more and stopped reporting every poorly designed study as a rewrite of the Gospel, the public would get less confused. Pointing the finger for confusion at the medical profession is easy, but wrong. Perhaps a little journalistic navel gazing is required...?
They have no idea at all. Just eat anything you like,actually we are doing best naturally like we like to eat a lot of different type of foods so whats the point asking people to do that we are already doing it.
If you are an active person just do not read all these rubbish and carry on with your life eating reading making sex and enjoying yourself.
30 years ago they said take supplement now they say not good.
Eating spagetty was not to good now is okay they say using olive oil.In Australia health experts advice us not to eat palm oil now its okay they say better then trans fat. Canada recommend CANOLA oil.Its not vegetable oil its CANADA OIL so when you name it Canola oil it sounds like a vegetable oil and its not.
So considering of promoting national industry and job opportunities and job security of the people whom advice us eat this do not eat this its an insult to our intelligence if you care to believing them.
They must be saying "Thank god for the stupid community so we can getaway with any advice.
Well not me.
He says vitamins produce only expensive urine. He obviously hasn't done much research except trumpet the main stream medical views.
For a start Mr Laurence might try just looking at the huge amount of scientific data amassed just on vitamin D3. He then might look at all the studies about high dosages of vitamin C, Lysine and Proline and the effects of heart disease and atherosclerosis. Mr Laurence's advice sounds like it is being copied from a Government health pamphlet and bugger all research.
Lift your game JL, start being a reporter and not a repeater!
Get with the Game JL
Is the secret to good health and low risk of heart disease...
Or am I just a caveman????
You forgot to mention they can all give you 'rebound' headaches if taken too often (more than 3 times a week). Some people suffering from daily headaches don't realise it's the analgesics they're taking causing them, in a viscous cycle. Codeine is an opiate and has a number of nasty side effects and withdrawal symptoms if taken in excess.
I do not think I am being harsh. As referred to in his own article, it is published literature such as his that misinforms the general public and perpetuates myths. He and his editor should be ashamed.
From a concerned specialist medical doctor in Bath.
Avoiding all this bed stuff will be the death of me...
It is journalists I don't trust, and their habit of misquoting and misrepresenting said output in the interests of a good story. As Mr Laurance demonstrates so well..
Compared to the low level of informed opinion from the editor, Jeremy Laurence, it is little wonder why more and more people are moving away from the MSM and getting their information from other more reliable sources.
The informed public are now the new journalists and the journalists are now the new uniformed!
Back to journalistic school for you Mr Laurence!
The truth is that whilst the waiting times suggest a lower wait this is misleading.
There is plenty of evidence of gaming in the system, where patients that are going to take longer than the targets allow for are moved into another queue.
Or another trick is that the person in the queue is seen by somebody (even if it isn't the right person), and that this then meets the target.
Also the targets are undermining performance. If it would be possible to do better than 18 weeks, where is the impetus to do this? Surely aiming for perfection is much better?
Plus where do you start the clock? When somebody is referred from their GP? Or sees a nurse? Or sees a specialist consultant? Or it is decided that they require an operation?
This is the biggest government lie ever, please don't fall for the old adage that targets have worked - they haven't.
And with aspirin, alcohol etc. there is no clue as to dosage. One glass a day or a week, versus I bottle of gin a day, 160 mg, or 350 plus mg of aspirin ?
same with coffee...
I'd be grateful if people would check it out the article and let me know what they think!