Re: Question re: Meta-Analysis


"Jason" <jason@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:jason-1510050718080001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In article <dipu8p$3cm$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Rind
> <drind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Jason wrote:
> > > I have a question about a term used in a recent post:
> > > META-ANALYSIS OF DATA--
> > >
> > > If a statin company wanted to prove that statins do not cause
> > > cancer, would it be possible to do the following:
> > >
> > > Step 1
> > > Secretly do a Meta-Analysis of Data of 50 studies.
> > >
> > > Step 2
> > > Eliminate any of the studies that showed that
> > > statins do cause cancer.
> > >
> > > Step 3
> > > Do a Meta-Analysis of Data of the 20 studies that
> > > showed that statins do NOT cause cancer.
> > >
> > > Step 4
> > > Release to the news media the results of the
> > > Meta-Anylysis of Data of the 20 studies that
> > > that showed that statins do NOT cause cancer.
> > >
> > > They could say in the press release:
> > > The results of previous radomised trials show that
> > > statins do not cause cancer.
> >
> > No, not in the way you described. The studies that could potentially be
> > used in the meta-analysis are published, and the meta-analysis lists the
> > included studies, so there is no "secret" involved.
> >
> > However, sometimes it's not clear what studies should or should not be
> > included in the analysis, and it is possible that decisions about this
> > could alter the results. This has come up with meta-analyses of
> > screening for breast cancer, for instance.
> >
> > In the case of the statin studies, most are well known and well
> > designed. But, implicit in my earlier post, I was arguing that ALLHAT
> > should potentially not have been included with the other studies because
> > I don't like the way it was carried out. Of course, if I wanted to slant
> > the results in favor of statins I would make just such an argument
> > because ALLHAT showed little or no benefit with statins. And so, if I
> > published a meta-analysis that excluded ALLHAT, people would have to
> > decide whether I was doing this out of a prostatin bias or because I had
> > legitimate impartial concerns about ALLHAT.
> >
> > Personally, I'd be quite concerned about a meta-analysis backed by a
> > drug company that excluded a large negative study like ALLHAT, but more
> > comfortable if the same meta-analysis were performed by someone without
> > such ties.
>
> Thanks for your post. I will only comment on your last point. Statin
> companies donate or contribute money to various colleges and agencies that
> conduct research studies related to statins. The people employed by those
> colleges and agencies know that those statin companies will STOP donating
> or contributing money to them if they produce studies that show that
> statins have side effects. As a result, I don't trust studies that are
> done by those sorts of agencies and colleges. Do you have this same
> attitude about those types of colleges and agenicies?
> Jason

The UCSD study is sponsored by a Johnson and Johnson fund.

What do you say about that Jason? Should they, J and J, continue to fund it?

Most of the applied research is carried out by private companies. Some NIH
grant money sponsores primary research and if anything is discovered that is
marketable, it is given to private companies to develop and they have to
perform their own studies for FDA approval.

As far as statin research, there is competition out there from statin
companies trying to trump their own drug and trashing the others.
You can learn from those studies as some backfire on the companies. You also
have CoQ companies that don't want to trash statins too much because they
bring in revenue.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question: blood test results
    ... I seem to recall a recent thread or two where Jason asked about ... > it was so rare. ... > effect of statins is only "rare" in a large population. ... > well known statin adverse effect, and the most frequently experienced statin ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: message for Sharon
    ... >>> been harmed or disabled by statins. ... >>> their levels of compassion by what they write in their posts. ... >>> Jason ... > looses lots of points and will end up losing debates. ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: message for Sharon
    ... >>> harmed or disabled as a result of taking statins. ... Jason ... > calling" looses lots of points and will end up losing debates. ... someone recently referred to Dr. Andrew Chung as a "quack". ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: message for Sharon
    ... >>> Jason, ... >>> NEVER seen anyone say that statins do not come with side effect risk. ... >> looses lots of points and will end up losing debates. ... We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: statins dont reduce dementia risk
    ... > Jason wrote: ... >>> statins, I was wrong to do so. ... >> Statins and Plaque ... >> We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)