Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 2 September 2008 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2008.1076
News
Cholesterol-lowering drug given cancer all-clear
Full trial results and meta-analysis both contradict preliminary scare.
A class of cholesterol-lowering drug that had been implicated in a cancer scare has been cleared by epidemiologists using the results from two large ongoing clinical trials.
That 'meta-analysis', led by Richard Peto of the University of Oxford, UK, is published online today by the New England Journal of Medicine1, along with full results of the trial that first raised the scare, which were also presented today at the European Society of Cardiology congress in Munich, Germany.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
Unfortunately, although a very large number of publications, even in www.nature.com (Quantum Biophysical Semeiotics and Cancer Real Risk http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/07/newsweak_darwin_vs_lincoln.html#comments http://blogs.nature.com/nm/spoonful/2008/07/product_placement.html#comments http://network.nature.com/forums/askthenatureeditor/1846?page=1#reply-5181 ; http://blogs.nature.com/nm/spoonful/2008/05/our_new_columns_narrowing_the.html#comments , and specially http://blogs.nature.com/nm/spoonful/2008/04/stress_as_a_therapy_1.html#comments http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/07/new_drug_for_prostate_cancer_e.html#comments http://blogs.nature.com/nature/journalclub/2008/02/nicholas_katsanis.html#comments http://blogs.nature.com/nm/spoonful/2008/08/the_best_defense_against_biowa.html#comments http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/08/bush_going_green_in_the_deep_b.html#comments http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080828/full/news.2008.1068.html?q=2#last-comment), the majority of scientists all around the world continuously either ignore or overlook both Oncological Terrain (OT) and OT-dependent INHERITED Real Risk (ask Google.com, or visit my website through www.Nature.com). In a few and clear words, no All individuals can be suffer from cancer in their life, but exclusively those involved since birth by Oncological Terrain. In addition, more precisely speaking, can be affected by cancer, e.g., in the stomach, "only" subjects positive for Oncological Terrain, showing OT-dependent INHERITED Real Risk in the stomach. Interestingly, these both health conditions, playing a central role in cancer primary prevention in future Medicine, may be bedside recognized in a quantitative way with a simple stethoscope in one minute, as allows me to state a year-long. well established, clinical experience. From the above remarks, it appears evident the fact that ALL cigarrettes smokers "without" OT or positive for OT, BUT not involved by LUNG oncological Inherited Real Risk, will surely not involved in their life-span by lung cancer. Are we allowed to state that cigarettes smoking does not brings about lung cancer? Once again, I thank Nature for the precious help, and outstanding contribute, offered me, to try to go out from the present Mean Age of Medicine, with greatest difficulty. Finally, recognized OT and OT-dependent Inherited Real Risk of cancer, we are nowadays able to treat them efficaciously in almost all cases, as I demonstrated in my books and articles (ibidem).