| Home | About Natural News | Contact Us | Write for Natural News | Media Information | Advertise with Natural News | ||||
![]() |
![]() |
|||
|
||||
|
|
The study documenting Accolate's ineffectiveness points out that the majority of prior studies "have been undertaken over short periods of six weeks [emphasis by study author] or less, which may not have allowed sufficient time for tolerance or tachyphylaxis to develop or be recognized." [Note: Tachyphylaxis refers to loss of effectiveness after removal of a drug.] Accolate is prescribed primarily for long term use. Side effects for Accolate include headaches, nausea, diarrhea, pneumonia, Churg-Strauss Syndrome (vasculitis of the lungs), hepatitis and other liver disease. Thus, a drug that is prescribed for long term use was tested for no more than six weeks before approval by the FDA. It has the potential of destroying your liver or causing pneumonia. It offers no long term benefit. On withdrawal of the drug, the patient's condition gets worse. The Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine The Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine does the opposite of most medical journals. Rather than reporting almost exclusively on studies that had positive results -- in the sense that they're beneficial to pharmaceutical companies -- this one reports exclusively on studies with negative results. It fulfills a much needed function, since negative results are rarely published. In honest science, results should be considered valuable, whether they are positive or negative. If the study is well done, then the information should be considered of interest, as it adds to the base of knowledge. Unfortunately, this is not usually the case. So, The Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine helps fill the gap. Study Methodology Subjects This was a double-blind placebo-controlled study. Group I consisted of 21 subjects who took only beta2-agonists to relieve asthma attacks. The 24 Group II subjects took both beta2-agonists to relieve asthma attacks and corticosteroids. The two groups were similar demographically. Group I had an age range of 21-69, with median of age 41. 10 were female and 11 were male. Group II had an age range of 19-65, with median age of 42. 14 were female and 10 were male. Both groups were randomized to determine which would receive Accolate and which would take placebo. The subjects can be typified as suffering from moderately severe asthma. All were asthmatics who had not gained symptom relief from the use of beta2-agonists alone for at least one year or who took a moderate-to-high dose of inhaled corticosteroids, plus beta2-agonists, for at least four weeks prior to the trial. Things that excluded potential subjects were upper respiratory tract infection, changes in asthma medication during the previous 6 weeks, or usage of oral corticosteroids in the three months prior to the trial. Anyone who had taken any of the following drugs during the 6 weeks prior to screening was excluded: long-lasting beta2-agonist, anticholinergic, cromone, or theophylline. All subjects were volunteers. Five of the 43 subjects who started did not complete the study. The number in each group at the start of the study was: Group I: * 14 subjects - Accolate * 7 subjects - placebo Group II: * 16 subjects - Accolate * 8 subjects - placebo At the end, the number of remaining subjects was: Group I: * 12 subjects - Accolate * 5 subjects - placebo Group II: * 15 subjects - Accolate * 8 subjects - placebo 27 of the remaining subjects took Accolate and 13 took placebo. Adverse events directly associated with lung function during the trial include upper respiratory tract infection, inability to withhold beta2-agonist medication for six hours before a lung function test, and lung function deteriorating too much to continue. All but one of these subjects took Accolate. During withdrawal of Accolate, one subject's asthma worsened so much that oral corticosteroids were required. Other adverse events included worsening rheumatoid arthritis and angina, both of which occurred in subjects who took placebo. The trial lasted 14 weeks -- one screening week, 12 weeks of taking the drugs and one following week to see if there were any withdrawal effects. All subjects were given the same dose of Accolate or a placebo that looked identical and was dispensed in an identical package. Study Measurements Several measures were used throughout the study period. These included: * Daily recording of symptoms by the subjects. * Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF), which measures the maximum air flow at the beginning of forced expiration. This test was done every day before either the study medication (Accolate/placebo) or the beta2-agonist. * Spirometry (breath measurement) after inhaling methacholine (FEV). This is a standard test for asthma. * Profiles of sputum and blood. Study Results The study produced definitive results. Although there were initial improvements in symptoms in subjects taking Accolate, by five weeks the degree of improvement started to fall, by the end of week 11 dropping to the level at which they'd started. When the drug was withdrawn, symptoms worsened. Results Before Withdrawal Subjects who took Accolate had a significant increase in neutrophils after withdrawal. Neutrophils are blood cells that fight bacterial infections. Increases in them generally occur because of infection. The study's authors stated that the subjects did not exhibit any symptomatic deterioration related to this, but one must wonder if further investigations would have documented problems. Sputum testing showed no difference between Accolate and placebo groups. Nitric oxide in exhalations was unchanged in the two groups. Spirometry did not result in any significant distinctions between Accolate and placebo. The Peak Expiratory Flow test, which tests actual breathing function, was highly significant. Subjects who took Accolate had a distinct improvement through week five. However, by week six, they started to lose their gains, reaching the same level that they'd had on starting the trial. Results After Withdrawal Among subjects who took placebo, there was no drop-off of function after withdrawal. Among those who took Accolate, the authors stated that there were "significant physical deteriorations" after withdrawal. They continued, "There was a clear 'over-shoot' to worse than study entry values in essentially all lung function and clinical parameters." What This Study Reveals Obviously, this study demonstrates that Accolate does more harm than good. What little good it does is short-lived and paid for by worsening of the asthmatic condition. At this time, there is no information to indicate how severe the rebound is, since the implications of increased neutrophils are not known, nor is it known whether the worsening is permanent. We do know, though, that the entire system of drug testing for FDA approval does not work. Had a longer term study been done on Accolate, then its lack of efficacy could have been discovered and it would never have made it to market. It was first approved in 1996. Now, in 2008 -- 12 years later --we're seeing a study that should have been required before approval. What is revealed here is the utter corruption of the system of medication in the United States. Accolate is just one drug. We've recently seen that Vioxx had to kill over 60,000 people before the FDA took action. How many more people will be killed or maimed before this disaster ends? References: Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine, "Tolerance and rebound with zafirlukast in patients with persistent asthma", David W Reid, Neil L Misson, Shashi Aggarwal, Philip J Thompson, David P Johns, E Haydn Walters, (http://www.jnrbm.com/content/7/1/3) electronic Medicines Compendium, (http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/ass...) About the author* Heidi Stevenson, BSc, DIHom, FBIH* Fellow, British Institute of Homeopathy * Gaia Health (http://www.gaia-health.com) * * The author is a homeopath who became concerned with medically-induced harm as a result of her own experiences and those of family members. She says that allopathic medicine is the arena that best describes the motto, "Buyer beware." * * * Heidi Stevenson provides information about medically-induced disease and disability, along with incisive well-researched articles on major issues in the modern world, so members of the public can protect themselves. * She can be reached through her website: www.gaia-health.com Related CounterThink Cartoons:
|
![]() 8 Weeks to Vibrant HealthLearn why this is the must-read guide to women's health you've been waiting for... Click here...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| What is this? |
Recommended Products Related to This Article*:The Biology of Belief by Bruce LiptonA free download of Biology of Belief for learning about the mind-biology connection The Genie In Your Genes by Dawson Church A free, downloadable summary of this book for learning about the biology of intention Revealed: Natural Health Solutions (free) Free summary of book by Mike Adams for learning censored natural health remedies The Weiss Method for Heart Disease☯ How to reverse heart disease naturally for heart disease, high cholesterol Exposed! The Toxic Chemistry of Products Free summary of this shocking book for learning the truth about toxic products Appetite for Profit (free download) Free download summary of this top book for discovering the truth about food companies Additional Products of Interest to AllKatadyn Exstream XR Water Purifier☯#1 personal water purifier for clean, pristine water in seconds Preparedness Tools Natural News Bundle☯ For preparedness and safety: 60% off for preparing for natural disasters How to Halt Diabetes in 25 Days☯ Health Ranger guide to reversing diabetes for reversing type-2 diabetes Free download: Selling Sickness (summary) Read the best book on disease mongering for learning the truth about Big Pharma Katadyn MicroPur Water Purifier Tablets☯ The best water purification tablets for purifying almost any water source * Products do NOT pay to be listed here. These are genuine, independent recommendations by the Health Ranger ☯ Products with this symbol are sold by NaturalNews or its affiliates and earn revenues for NaturalNews |
Also on NaturalNews:• Streaming Health Ranger Videos• CounterThink Cartoons • FREE Special Reports • Podcasts |
Home | About Natural News | Contact Us | Write for Natural News | Media Information | Advertise with Natural News This site is part of the Natural News Network © 2009 All Rights Reserved. Privacy | Terms All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing International, LTD. is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms and those published here. All trademarks, registered trademarks and servicemarks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners. |
![]() |