Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
 
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
 arrow  PubMed                        
space

CURRENTS

News Notes

15 January 1998 | Volume 128 Issue 2 | Page 164


Evidence-Based Coronary Artery Disease Prevention?
space

Physicians may be more conservative in prescribing antioxidants for their patients than for themselves, according to a recent survey of members of the American College of Cardiology. As might be expected, the cardiologists had less coronary artery disease (CAD) and fewer risk factors than the general population. Nevertheless, they treated themselves with antioxidants more aggressively than they treated their CAD patients.

Although 44% of the physicians reported regularly taking antioxidants, only 37% recommended them to their patients with CAD (Am J Cardiol. 1997; 79:1558-60). Vitamin E was the most common antioxidant (39%) used by physicians, followed by vitamin C (33%) and ß-carotene (19%); their prophylactic aspirin use was slightly lower (42%) than their antioxidant use. Twenty-eight percent of the physicians took both aspirin and antioxidants.

The author notes that although some benefits of aspirin and vitamin E in primary and secondary CAD prevention have been documented, use of vitamin C and ß-carotene cannot be supported by the reported data. The study was completed by student Jason Mehta, with the help of his father, Jawahar L. Mehta, MD, PhD, professor of medicine and physiology at the University of Florida College of Medicine in Gainesville.


Internet Information on Gastrointestinal Diseases May Be Questionable
space

Ten percent of Internet sites offering treatment advice for gastrointestinal diseases posted remedies that are of no proven benefit, according to a study presented at a November meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology in Chicago. The researchers explored 100 sites with information on pancreatic cancer, duodenal ulcer, hepatitis C, and the irritable bowel syndrome. In conditions for which there is satisfactory medical treatment-for example, duodenal ulcer-no sites included unproven therapies. But for functional gastrointestinal disorders, such as the irritable bowel syndrome, 23% of sites included unproven therapies. For hepatitis C and pancreatic cancer, 17.6% and 12.5% of sites, respectively, included unproven therapies.

The authors noted that Web sites sponsored by government agencies, universities, and medical organizations provided more reliable information than sites sponsored by commercial organizations or individuals.





box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
 arrow  PubMed                        
space


 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online