Pfizer Cuts Off Cholesterol Drug Trials

Filed at 9:55 p.m. ET

NEW YORK (AP) -- Pfizer Inc. said Saturday it has cut off all clinical trials and development for a cholesterol drug that was supposed to be the star of its pipeline because of an unexpected number of deaths and cardiovascular problems in patients who used it.

The world's largest drugmaker said it was told Saturday that an independent board monitoring a study for torcetrapib, a drug that raises levels of good cholesterol, recommended that the work end because of ''an imbalance of mortality and cardiovascular events.''

Pfizer said it is asking all clinical investigators conducting trials to warn patients to stop taking the drug immediately.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Pfizer-Cholesterol-Drug.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

A Bombshell Drops on Cholesterol Medication's Glass House
http://www.newstarget.com/021147.html

for some people. The problem appears to be guidelines prescribing statins for people who have a normal cholesterol level and/or prescribing statins to lower cholesterol levels to an unhealthy level. Clearly the writer has an ax to grind regarding statins, yet even he is careful to discuss specific populations. In other words, this is not a case of all stains are bad for everybody.

of dangerous side effects.

Like your Lipitor, do you?

Doctors says _WE_ need to "get those numbers down"?

Better read this first then, before your number is up.

www.spacedoc.net

Someone just skimming it would think it condemns the use of statin drugs for anyone. It condemns the use of statin drugs for everyone. Although it is not stated explicitly, the implication is that there are studies out there showing that statin drugs are useful for people meeting certain limited criteria. For example, lowering cholesterol below 130 is useless or even harmful, but the implication is that lowering cholesterol to 130 may be beneficial.

It's obviously sad when thes things happen, but at least I'm glad that they took a close look at the data.

When Merck was testing Vioxx, they had a lot of extra deaths - but the FDA and Merck let it on the market anyway. 50,000 US deaths later (yes, 20x those killed by 9/11), the stuff finally got pulled from the shelves.

There are any number of Statins that reduce cholesterol, but as of today there ARE no drugs out there to simply raise the HDL levels. There are a few things you can do to help it along naturally--like exercise and supplement with Garlic, Curry and Niacin (carefully!) but they just don't have that pill thing figured out yet.

Start to learn a bit more about natural solutions at a site with some studies cited that support the claims:

http://www.smart-kit.com/s146/the-methusalah-syndrome-and-13-ways-to-raise-your-hdl-naturally/


What really pisses me off about a lot of this is the fact that blood levels of cholesterol really are NOT as significant of a predictor of heart disease as we are being led to think. In most of the studies (once you really look at them rather than reading the press releases) the folks having heart attacks and coronary issues are not always the ones with the high cholesterol levels.

This WHOLE drug intervention thing really IS being driven by the drug companies. They are setting the standards and they are reaping the profits.


Laura

Edited to add link

until my insurance company sent me counterfeit lipitor for which I had a $120. co-pay. It made me sick , so I said no more to that crap, went on an increased execise regime and have it down to where I don't need statins. They give that stuff out like candy instead of telling the patient to get off their fat ass and stop eating so many doghnuts.


mmm..just finished a Boston Creme....

He was in apparent good shape and had been planning his wedding. Our doctor has monitored my husband's cholesterol for years. He was slightly underweight, but his cholesterol was too high. He reduced it through diet, but it crept back up despite the fact that he maintained his good eating habits. The doctor started him on a statin and later added niacin. Comparing my husband's general health status to that of his two brothers, I'm glad we have a doctor who believes in preventive medicine.

Life is unfair; my cholesterol levels are perfect, and I don't eat way more sweets than my husband!

the drug companies which run TV ads non-stop encouraging people to self-proscribe and ask for drugs that may not even work and that they may not even need.

My godmother weighed well over 250 lbs. and she cooked all sorts of very rich foods and ate them her entire life.

She lived to be 101 years old btw.

I'd like to know what her cholesterol was!

They did not have this big cholesterol thing going at the time she died which was in the mid-1980s.

Everyone should be on these expensive statin drugs for this reason, that reason or some other "magic" reason.

This is a fine example of the pharmaceutical industry profiteering and nothing more, except that they ignore the people that die while they "experiment" on people with their bogus/deadly chemicals.

:dem: :kick:

I'm heavier than I should be, and my cholesterol numbers are low. So are my parents'. My husband's numbers run high despite his being within recommended weight limits, and so do his parents'. On the other hand, everyone in my family develops hypertension at age 40 regardless of weight, so we all take anti-hypertensives. One example is only an anecdote. If this was a smoking thread, we'd hear all about someone who smoked a pack a day and lived to be 100hat doesn't change the fact that smoking is linked to many premature deaths.

I have been on it for years. It does raise my HDL Cholesterol. I have an old (pre-Statin) Merck Manual and in High Cholesterol cases it recommends putting such people on Niacin. As to Lipitor I have been on it for at least ten years. The combination with Zetia (another non-Statin but one that reduces Cholesterol as opposed to changes LDL to HDL-Cholesterol). I am also on Tricor (Prescription) and taking Fish oil pills (Non-prescription). This has reduced my LDL level to below 200 and my Triglyceride level to below 200 (When I started my HDL level was over 800, my Triglyceride over 560).

I do take the stuff that is tested for purity, but I take the high EPA & DHA stuff.

Just recently I read an article on a study about fish oil and its impact in sudden cardiac arrest. According to the article, if everybody started taking Omega three supplements it would save more lives than the portable Defib units in public places do!

I was a believer before I saw that article, but THAT just about clinched it for me--I'm staying on it the rest of my life. I also take a B complex tablet every day that is fairly high in Niacin (along with some E and C in those things for good measure.)

Similarly, I take CoQ10 every day, along with making several trips a week to the gym for a cardio workout. I'm doing a cardio workout along with free weight training at least three days per week, but usually more like four or five times a week. I think I FEEL better if I'm working out. I know I sleep better too...

My entire family has a history of heart problems and I'm watching my Dad suffer with Congestive Heart Failure every day. I will not passively head down THAT particular road if it can be avoided.

Keep watching that Triglyceride level, because I honestly think that is a much better warning of upcoming (potential) heart problems than anything else they are using right now. It is certainly indicative of a body that is dealing with some form of early metabolic issue and that most CERTAINLY is a contributor to heart disease in the long run.

Read Dr Barry Sears' work on inflammation if you want a better understanding of it all.

Regards!


Laura

Are you sure you didn't mean to type '80'?

Holy shit that's rich!

They'd might as well say "Side effects may include death or explosion of organs."

again

:sarcasm:

The animal tests showed the drug was safe enough to begin human trials.

Animal tests are about 50% accurate, i.e., might as well flip a coin.

Prescription drugs are one of the leading causes of death. Thinking that trying something out on a body that has little in common with our own is what leads to these deaths. The faster we modernize and use nonanimal tests, the better off we will all be.

Animal tests are absolutely necessary in drug trials.

50% of drugs that pass animal tests might still fail for a variety of reasons. But you still need to perform the animal tests before moving on to human volunteers.

"Prescription drugs are one of the leading causes of death."

Maybe now that prescription drugs have cured so many diseases.

"Thinking that trying something out on a body that has little in common with our own is what leads to these deaths."

Where on earth are you getting this nonsense? All drugs are tested on humans before their approved for use.

"he faster we modernize and use nonanimal tests, the better off we will all be."

It's got nothing to do with modernization. Animal tests are modern, and we're better off with them.

I didn't say prescription drugs don't help people. I said the testing methods are wrong and are hurting people.

In fact, start volunteering to test drugs that haven't first been tested on animals.

"I said the testing methods are wrong and are hurting people."

Testing on animals doesn't hurt anybody. That's the whole point.

We're currently arguing in two.

That explains it.

Fortunately not everyone is that cruel or short-sighted.

Isn't that like saying you're anti-sick people because you're against testing drugs?

Why do you hate those poor African children with AIDS, jilln?

consent or knowledge?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1220032.stm

Way to stop the suffering!!!

Stop twisting my words. I never said I was against testing drugs. I said I was against testing them inefficiently, ineffectively and cruelly on animals. I am all for testing them safely, humanely and effectively using modern methods that help people.

So am I.

"I am all for testing them safely, humanely and effectively using modern methods that help people."

This would mean you're for safe, humane, effective animal research.

Not that I think you mean it.

And I could care less what you think I mean. That "you only care about animals, not people" is another despicable tactic you pro-animal-abusers use and anyone with a shred of intelligence can see through it just like we can see through "We're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."

I'm so done with you. All you do is follow people around posting pro-animal-abuse BS and twisting words around. Welcome to my ignore list.

I do believe it was you that followed me to the horse thread in GD.

And I only posted here to point out that your argument about the animal tests being completely useless is completely false. You still haven't addressed that by the way, just started calling names.

Welcome to my Buddy list.

First of all, the idea that we EITHER test on animals OR we test on humans is ridiculous. There are many other options. Framing that way is just an attempt to make yourself sound reasonable and me unreasonable.

And despite your assertation that when animals are used "no one" gets hurt, here are some animal-test-approved drugs:

thalidomide
oraflex, opren - 60+ deaths
flenac
butazolidin - 10,000+ deaths
rezulin - 391+ deaths
propulsid - 300+ deaths
baycol - 100+ deaths
flosint
Nomifensin
Amrinone
Fialuridine
clioquinol - causes blindness and paralysis
Zomax
Opren - 61+deaths
Eraldin - 23+ deaths
fen-phen
vioxx

etc. etc. etc.

Conversely, there are MANY safe drugs that caused birth defects in lab animals:

Codeine, hydrocodone, erythromycin, morphine, streptomycin

In addition, the reliance on animal tests DELAYED development of the polio vaccine, diabetes research (disputing the role of the pancreas, which could not be reproduced in animals), aspirin, penicillin, etc. etc. etc.

Dr. Richard Klausner of the National Cancer Institute: “The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades, and it simply didn't work in humans.” (as quoted in the LA Times Wednesday, May 6, 1998)

Animal tests aren't performed as proof that they're safe on humans. They're used to test whether their safe enough to begin testing on humans.

"First of all, the idea that we EITHER test on animals OR we test on humans is ridiculous."

Indeed it is. Which is why you test on animals first, then humans.

is a non-stop advertising campaign on how to live a healthy life and examples of normal portion sizes. I know there are some people who will have heart attacks or diabetes or something else because of genetic predisposition, but for the vast majority of people it's pretty simple. If this were tried, I don't doubt that the drug companies will spend millions to send in reinforcements to defeat it. Prevention is the ticket.

But it will never happen as long as the Beef Council and Dairy Council are allowed to create the food pyramids used to teach our children in school. Nutrition is barely taught in medical school and most people think Mrs. Baird's whole wheat bread is actually "whole grain".

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Apparently it raises the "good cholesterol" by quite a lot. It's probably cheaper than a pill, too.

Pills are false hope packaged in bright colors.. The "placebo effect" and all.


A couple of drinks twice daily will keep you in better health, with a smile as a side effect.
Many like the herb which does the same.:)

Raw garlic will reduce your cholesterol by as much as 20% and that is a fact.
There are so many nutritional solutions to our health problems. We are not built as poorly as the drug companies want you to think. We poison ourselves.

For cholesterol try garlic. It worked for me and I have the lab results to prove it. Cutting down on sugar and doing liver cleansing by taking dandelion root or doing liver flushes will also lower your cholesterol.

I have researched natural remedies for years and I have tried many myself. I will only swear by the ones that worked for me. This one did.

Peace,
Jesse

all these drug companies are making billions on the cholest. drugs, that are basically a big scam!
Cholesterol isn't a bad thing. You have to have fat in your blood to survive. It's what happens in your veins, the immflammation you need to worry about. The Trans Fats and hydrogenated oils, etc. in processed foods can really tear up your arteries perforating them, so that cholesterol builds up in bigger glops. The popcorn effect would definitely cause a heart attack. The statin drugs can actually do more damage in that it depletes the body of CoQ10. Also note, that no disease can be present unless your ph level is out of whack;you must be alkalized. Natural foods can also help fight immflammation. The drug companies have no profit margin when they tell you to eat pure,unprocessed foods and to exercise. It's too simply a disaster for their companies. So make sure you take or eat Fish oils, and B vits and Coq10 and d-stress with exercise! I know, easier said than done!

a lot of pressure to have it succeed. (And sometimes to make it 'succeed' where it cannot.)

Three other people were supposed to be hired for the project I'm on, but that's been cancelled. And at least this didn't happen after the stuff got on the market, in which case the FDA can fine a pharm company a percentage of their gross income if they discover any wrongdoing.

The real problem is that clinical trials are done on thousands whereas the market can consist of millions: the odds of the drug having a bad effect on somebody can't help but increase. And that's why they're called clinical "trials"--there's no guarantee that you'll get the "verdict" you want.

:headbang:
rocknation