New drug produces steep drop in bad cholesterol

[Duer 157099]

Source: Associated Press

CHICAGO — An experimental drug boosted good cholesterol so high and dropped bad cholesterol so low in a study that doctors were stunned and voiced renewed hopes for an entirely new way of preventing heart attacks and strokes.

"We are the most excited we have been in decades," said Dr. Christopher Cannon of Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, who led the study of the novel drug for Merck & Co. "This could really be the next big thing."

The drug, anacetrapib (an-uh-SEHT'-ruh-pihb), will not be on the market anytime soon. It needs more testing to see if its dramatic effects on cholesterol will translate into fewer heart attacks, strokes and deaths. Merck announced a 30,000-patient study to answer that question, and it will take several years.

But the sheer magnitude of the new medicine's effects so far excited lots of doctors at an American Heart Association conference in Chicago, where results were presented on Wednesday.

Read more: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20101117/NEWS/101119526/1350?Title=New-drug-produces-steep-drop-in-bad-cholesterol

[Donnachaidh]

1. sounds good, but what's the side effects and/or trade off?

Been watching far too many commercials for miracle drugs for asthma that have the possibility of death due to asthma, or blowing out the immune system and putting you at risk for TB, etc. Bone drugs that cause large bone fractures, etc.

They should wait, and test the bejesus out of this *miracle*.

[Duer 157099]

3. Exactly. It will take years of more testing to know, if then

I'm betting that something like Alzheimer's will be a side effect and won't show up for years.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. one side effect:

it makes people think liberal thoughts, ie, supporting scientific research, supporting the theory of evolution, supporting nuke treaties with Russia, and supporting publicly funded education, especially higher education.

[IDemo]

6. It's doomed to fail, then

[TheDebbieDee]

4. Any drug that works that well MUST have horrible side-effects!

Maybe my va-jay-jay will fall out or something!

[D-Lee]

5. Sounds like disaster and invitation to ill-health (the dummies!)

Taking cholesterol out of the body ("It helps keep fat particles attached to HDL, which carries them in the bloodstream to the liver to be disposed of.") not always such a great idea. Hint: cholesterol forms the outside of nerve cells. The body makes cholesterol because it is used in normal physiological processes. One doesn't want too much cholesterol "disposed of."

The "low" numbers often are accompanied by increased cancer risk ... well documented that there is a J-curve, where too low is dangerous.

[REP]

7. Some patients do need some sort of pharmaceutical intervention, though

There are some diseases - chronic renal failure come to mind, but there are others - that cause severe hyperlipidemia, despite the what the patient does to control it. These drugs may be overused in patients for whom dietary changes would suffice, but for those with chronic disease that causes artheriosclerosis, this might be good news. MIGHT be.

[customerserviceguy]

8. Reminds me of Glinda

"Are you a good cholesterol, or a bad cholesterol?"

[Divernan]

9. Huge money maker for Merck: Americans get to pay 3x what rest of world pays.

"We are the most excited we have been in decades". We all know that what excites Big Pharma is big profit. The 30,000 patient study will be comprised of 30,000 Americans. Our country, as per usual, provides the guinea pigs for Big Pharma. Then Big Pharma charges so much more to Americans that many can't afford to buy the drug. One in 5 US adults have borderline high cholesterol levels, OMG, how the profits will roll in.


As one of my medical friends commented, Big Pharma NEVER wants to cure disease - they just want to lock people in to a lifetime of taking their drugs. I was on cholesterol meds until I changed my diet, started exercising and lost weight.

[elias7]

10. In trashing "big Pharma", don't throw out the baby with the bathwater

The FDA requires multi-phase clinical process taking many years and costing many millions of dollars. There is infinitely more data on the drugs that "Big Pharma" releases than on the herbal/natural remedies some espouse, which have virtually no testing or research. The herbal/natural industry is possibly even more corrupt than big Pharma since there is no regulation, there is no body of ongoing research to determine efficacy/toxicity, and it is as much a cash cow for the snake oil salesmen-- nordic naturals, nature made, carlson laboratories, vitamin shoppe, native, nature's way, BioNutritional Research Group, source naturals, spectrum naturals, optimum nutrition, twinlab, M.D. select, garden of life, bragg MHP, cytosport, lumina, country life, stiff, worldwide sport, GNC, vitacost, NOW, rainbow light, solaray... who have taken advantage of the consumer in much the way the Koch Brothers have duped the tea-baggers who in turn dupe the voting public.

Big pharma is an industry. They have terrific R&D people who invent and create chemicals that can improve our lives. These drugs are not without risks, and that is why the process can take 10-15 years for a single drug to be approved. The cost to the company is millions and millions of dollars. And once a drug is approved, the company is still liable in case of unforeseen post-marketing problems that lead to huge lawsuits. People need to give them their due. Businesses, as we know, will resort to unbridled greed unless regulated, and pharmaceutical companies are no different. The products can be life saving, life enhancing, life lengthening and should be considered as part of any holistic approach to health. If you can't lower your cardiac risk by lowering cholesterol through diet, exercise, and weight loss, then these drugs are useful. Some people don't realize that hyperlipidemia is genetic-- types I through V are all "familial"-- there is proportionately less acquired dyslipidemia.