More on blood pressure drugs...
 

http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/08/17/t...e-ineffective/

http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD0067...on-are-unclear

"Treating mild high blood pressure with drugs found to be ineffective"

Hmmm. Ya don't say?

"We’ve long known that almost all benefit from treating severe
hypertension comes with lowering BP [blood pressure] just a little. On
the other hand, efforts to lower BP to ‘normal,’ typically requiring
multiple drugs, are not only usually unsuccessful but produce more
harm than good, since adverse effects of intensive treatment outweigh
the minimal marginal benefit of a little more BP ‘control.’ Drug
treatment of mild hypertension….may be of great value to drug makers,
but it was almost predictable that it would provide little or no
benefit for patients."

"Results showed that in those treated with active medication (compared
to placebo) we

At no reduced risk of developing heart disease
At no reduced risk of stroke
At no reduced risk of ‘total cardiovascular events’ (essentially
heart attacks and strokes combined)
At no reduced risk of overall risk of death"

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

More on blood pressure drugs...
 

What are those, i.e. mild high, severe, in numbers. I hate articles that
give descriptions that are so vague when numbers are clearly appropriate.

Dogman wrote:
|
http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/08/17/t...e-ineffective/
|
|
http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD0067...on-are-unclear
|
| "Treating mild high blood pressure with drugs found to be ineffective"
|
| Hmmm. Ya don't say?
|
| "We've long known that almost all benefit from treating severe
| hypertension comes with lowering BP [blood pressure] just a little. On
| the other hand, efforts to lower BP to 'normal,' typically requiring
| multiple drugs, are not only usually unsuccessful but produce more
| harm than good, since adverse effects of intensive treatment outweigh
| the minimal marginal benefit of a little more BP 'control.' Drug
| treatment of mild hypertension..may be of great value to drug makers,
| but it was almost predictable that it would provide little or no
| benefit for patients."
|
| "Results showed that in those treated with active medication (compared
| to placebo) we
|
| At no reduced risk of developing heart disease
| At no reduced risk of stroke
| At no reduced risk of 'total cardiovascular events' (essentially
| heart attacks and strokes combined)
| At no reduced risk of overall risk of death"

More on blood pressure drugs...
 

On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:14:18 -0400, "FOB"
wrote:

What are those, i.e. mild high, severe, in numbers. I hate articles that
give descriptions that are so vague when numbers are clearly appropriate.

What are what? Did you check the second link? Lots of numbers there.

Dogman wrote:
|
http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/08/17/t...e-ineffective/
|
|
http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD0067...on-are-unclear
|
| "Treating mild high blood pressure with drugs found to be ineffective"
|
| Hmmm. Ya don't say?
|
| "We've long known that almost all benefit from treating severe
| hypertension comes with lowering BP [blood pressure] just a little. On
| the other hand, efforts to lower BP to 'normal,' typically requiring
| multiple drugs, are not only usually unsuccessful but produce more
| harm than good, since adverse effects of intensive treatment outweigh
| the minimal marginal benefit of a little more BP 'control.' Drug
| treatment of mild hypertension..may be of great value to drug makers,
| but it was almost predictable that it would provide little or no
| benefit for patients."
|
| "Results showed that in those treated with active medication (compared
| to placebo) we
|
| At no reduced risk of developing heart disease
| At no reduced risk of stroke
| At no reduced risk of 'total cardiovascular events' (essentially
| heart attacks and strokes combined)
| At no reduced risk of overall risk of death"

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

More on blood pressure drugs...
 

On Aug 17, 4:36*pm, Dogman wrote:

In the interests of full disclosure.....

First, this link is to Dr. Biffa who previously has said
that avoiding one stroke in 32 men over 5 years by
using BP medications that lower BP just 10 points
is a "slim benefit".

Now, I don't know about anyone else, but to me
avoiding one stroke in 32 men over 5 years is a
HUGE benefit. Think of the resulting deaths,
lifelong disabilities, healthcare costs, etc. What
does one stroke patient cost us? And BP medications
are among the safest and best tolerated drugs out there.
So to call it a slim benefit is enough to put you in
my kook bin.

Speaking of which, this continued rant against
drugs is brought to you by Dogman, who believes:

HIV is not the cause of AIDS
HIV is harmless
AIDS is caused by diet and lack of sleep
AIDS is caused by AIDS drugs
No virus can cause cancer
HPV is not a cause of cervical cancer.
Avoiding that 1 stroke in 32 men every 5 years
is a slim benefit

Evaluate the above before buying into his
"science".

For an alternate view on BP medications:

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/ar...an-save-l.html



"The new report suggests that treating even relatively mild high blood
pressure of between 90 and 114 diastolic, which is the second of a
pair of numbers given for blood pressure readings, significantly
reduces the risk of death.

The results were compiled by Dr. Charles H. Hennekens and colleagues
at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston and Oxford University and
were presented Monday at a meeting in San Francisco sponsored by the
American Heart Association."