Canakinumab. A New Wonder Drug! Promoted by the mainstream media

The mainstream media, urged on by their pharmaceutical sponsors, have announced that the drug Canakinumab is a new wonder drug. This Telegraph headline gives a flavour of what the pharmaceutical industry wants us to know. 

"New wonder drug hailed as biggest breakthrough in fight against heart attacks and cancer".

Wonderful news, except that regular readers of this blog will probably know that I am not over-impressed with such claims. During the last 60 years we have been deluged with similar claims for a wide variety of new drugs that have never materialised. Even their most success drugs are now failing - painkillers are too dangerous for doctors to prescribe - antibiotics are becoming increasingly unable to kill bugs which are now largely resistant to them, and so on. And we now face epidemics of chronic disease, largely as a result of the side effects and adverse reactions to these same drugs.

The drug costs £40,000 per patient per year! Yet, as usual, there is no mention that the new wonder drug might cause serious side effects. But of course, it does, and these are outlined on the Drugs.com website. It starts with a warning. 

               "Even though it may be rare, some people may have very bad and sometimes deadly side effects when taking a drug." (My emphasis).

So patients are advised to contact their doctor, and get medical help immediately if any of the following side effects are experienced.

• Signs of an allergic reaction, like rash; hives; itching; red, swollen, blistered, or peeling skin with or without fever
• Wheezing; tightness in the chest or throat; trouble breathing or talking; unusual hoarseness; or swelling of the mouth, face, lips, tongue, or throat.
• Signs of infection like fever, chills, very bad sore throat, ear or sinus pain, cough, more sputum or change in color of sputum, pain with passing urine, mouth sores, or wound that will not heal.
• Cough that does not go away.
• Weight loss.
• Dizziness or passing out.
• Very bad irritation where the shot was given.
• Trouble swallowing.
• Very upset stomach or throwing up.
• A heartbeat that does not feel normal.
• A very bad and sometimes deadly problem called Macrophage Activation Syndrome (MAS) may rarely happen in people with juvenile arthritis.

Canakinum is also known to cause headache, stomach pain, upset stomach or throwing up, diarrhoea, muscle pain. weight gain, sore throat, runny nose, and flu-like signs.

If the mainstream media was motivated, in any way, to protect patients from iatrogenic harm as they clearly are to promote pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, they may have wanted to take time to read, and mention these problems associated with this new wonder drug to their readers!

Regular readers will also know that I don't always report on them (it would become somewhat boring and monotonous), but there are reasons for doing so in this case. I went on to read some of the comments made on the Telegraph article. They are interesting, and you should read them too! They are almost entirely cynical about the article, to say the very least. It shows that people are beginning to realise that the tactic of announcing a new 'wonder drug' is a marketing ploy, one which never materialises! 

Perhaps the mainstream media might also read the comments, and learn from them. Their promotion of pharmaceutical drugs is meeting reasoned and thoughtful resistance. Continuing to promote pharmaceutical drugs is damaging the credibility of the press and media with the public.

• Here are just a few of the comments. First, a quotation from The New England Journal of Medicine:

     "Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P=0.31)."

So no real benefit in terms of improved longevity compared to a sugar pill; dead is still dead, regardless of cause. Certainly not worth £40,000 per year.

• Hmm. Stains do not have a sound record but I do hope this new product will really help those that need it. Each year, it is suggested by my GP that I take up Statins. I always refuse because I am not vulnerable to heart attacks and my parent never suffered from them . Furthermore, my Cholesterol and Triglycerides readings when taken, are below alert  levels. So why am I so encouraged? Because they will help me. I cannot resist the thought that NICE who promote the prescription of this drug, are paid a commission on sales. I believe the Global annual sales of Statins now exceed $50 Billions per year and that is one big incentive to push the product.

• BTW did you kniow that cancer is now a  $125 Billions per year Industry? In the USA alone? With that sort of income, why would anyone want to create a cure?

• Oh dear, a monoclonal antibody therapy. 1 vial of 150 mg costs 9927.80 quid. I cannot see NICE paying for it. Not four times per year per patient. We shall see.

• Another week - another wonder drug you'll never hear about again. The establishment don't really want you to have 'wonder drugs' that work. Although they are quite happy for you to have 'wonder drugs' with bad side effects - like statins. What on earth benefit does it have to them to help OAP's to continue to live longer by giving them expensive life prolonging drugs? 

• Not again!

• Hold on I am sure I read about the wonder drug interleukin decades ago.

• The non mainstream healthcare sector has believed for years that inflammation can cause major health issue. There is evidence linking inflammation to insulin resistance and obesity yet this is often ignore by the protectionist medical industry. Look at Linus Paulings Vic C, and Lysene protocol for reducing cholesterol and heart failure. Totally ignored by mainstream medicine because there is simply no profit in it. The possibility that inexpressive, uncontrolled substances may eliminate the need for complex 8 hour operations and months of expensive drugs doesn't sit well with those who provide the drugs and carry out the operations.

• The Wikipedia article on canakinumab says, 'On Aug 27, 2017 the results of the CANTOS trial were announced ... CANTOS saw a 15% reduction in deaths from heart attacks, stroke and cardiovascular disease combined. CANTOS also observed serious side-effects, and no overall survival benefit.'. Presumably then you're less likely to die of the things they're trying to treat, but more likely to die of the side-effects, and the two approximately cancel each other out.

• Everyone has to die of something eventually. I am 78, and just about the only one of my large group of friends not on medication. Many of them take statins, among other things. My doctor has tried, numerous times, to get me on them in spite of my cholesterol, blood pressure and heart all being perfectly fine. I have had a chest x-ray and blood tests recently, due to a chest infection. All the results were ok. I would rather die quickly of a heart attack, or fairly quickly of cancer than linger into old age and end up sitting in a nursing home with dementia and wasting my childrens' rather small inheritance on fees. I have always had a healthy suspicion of taking medication, and of the drug companies who make a fortune from pushing it. I lead a fairly active life, and will only take something if my GP can convince me that it is really needed. MY plan is to go out with a bang, not a whimper! Fingers crossed that I manage it!

• Actually what many Doctors won't tell you is that HIGH Cholesterol in the elderly is associated with ''longevity''! I'm reminded of a woman in America who had a cholesterol reading of 15 points (uk) which is approximately 3 times the guideline of about 5. Almost forgot. She was active, sharp, and ''105 years old''.

• It's an anti-inflammatory which works by knocking out the immune system. Use very carefully!

• Biggest breakthrough since STATINS eh! Shoot yourself in the foot why don't cha! Red rag to a bull time, so here we go ... Let's be clear. In spite of all the HYPE concerning STATINS they have NEVER been shown to prevent Heart-Disease or Heart Attacks, or even prevent a single Death ... And yet with the help of a corrupt culture of medical disinformation and a superb advertising campaign they are a 30 billion dollar a year industry. But perhaps far more worrying, Statins are increasingly linked to all manner of health problems, from Cancer to Alzheimer's and ironically to the one most common to all ... PREMATURE AGING. And somewhat strange that a suspect band of ?Experts? are at now odds with so many GP's and for that matter, even the literature of Lipitor the no1 best selling Statin drug in the world, which states .... ''Lipitor does not prevent heart disease or heart attacks''! ...... So why is it being prescribed on such vast scales, by so many medical practitioners .... ? Corruption?

• Hmm...... biggest breakthrough since statins. There is still alot of controversy regarding statins and even the medical profession can't agree with each other. I know plenty of people who have stopped taking these meds due to serious side affects, including memory loss. The pharmaceutical companies obviously want to push these drugs because of increased profits. I stopped taking statins due to serious side affects and feel alot better off them. Regarding this new drug, l hope it lives up to expectations.

• Why do I greet such headlines with a degree of cynicism? I suppose it's a bit like the reverse crying wolf.

• 200 000 people  x 40000 Pounds equals eight billion pounds per annum. Can't see this happening soon.

• Did someone buy some Novartis shares on Friday?

• OR, you could just include turmeric in your daily diet ritual which has proven anti-inflammatory properties without an injection or side effects.

• I would also advise the DT to read more widely on whether this is truly a wonder drug.  The NEJM's editorial concludes with the following sentence, "the modest absolute clinical benefit of canakinumab cannot justify its routine use in patients with previous myocardial infarction until we understand more about the efficacy and safety trade-offs and unless a price restructuring and formal cost-effectiveness evaluation supports it."

• Probably why they're interested in the further cancer research - I believe that if you find a new treatment for an existing drug, the patent clock is either restarted, or at least elongated.

Statins. An attempted rehabilitation by Big Pharma?

Most new pharmaceutical drugs are heralded as 'wonder cures' or 'main bullets', none more so than Statin drugs. When drug companies found that statins reduced cholesterol, they invented a connection between cholesterol and the heart. So taking statins reduced cholesterol and our hearts would benefit. Yet finding any real link between cholesterol of heart disease is proving difficult to find, other than its ability to sell the drugs!

However, statins, had arrived, and pharmaceutical companies proceeded to invent yet another lie. They were, they said, entirely safe! Indeed they were so safe we should ALL be taking them! So prescriptions for statins rocketed, and the pharmaceutical cash registers sang their songs of profit. The  drug companies were delighted.

But then, as happens with all pharmaceutical 'wonder' drugs, problems began to emerge. Statin drugs were not 'entirely safe', although the drug companies, the drug regulators, our doctors, and the mainstream media, decided not to tell the general public. The usual mantra was recited. The benefits outweigh the advantages! But as the years passed, and the evidence increased, his was increasingly difficult to justify. Doubts began to multiply about just how bad cholesterol was for our health.

The situation took a serious turn for the worse in 2010 when a Nottingham university study was published in the British Medical Journal. It found that people taking Statin drugs have a higher risk of

• liver dysfunction, 
• kidney failure, 
• muscle weakness,
• cataracts. 

The study was a large one, covering over 2 million people in Britain. Yet the list of adverse reactions was even then not comprehensive. The link between Statin drugs and diabetes (now at epidemic levels and usually blamed on our diet) was now linked to this 'entirely safe' drug.

Worse was to follow. The FDA (the USA drug regulator) reported on its website in January 2015 that statins were also linked with memory loss, confusion and dementia. The FDA stated that "it has been been investigating reports of coagnitive impairment from statin use for several years" and that "the agency has reviewed databases that record reports of bad reactions to drugs and statin clinical trials that included assessments of cognitive function." The report stated that memory loss, forgetfulness and confusion spanned "all statin products and all age groups."

Even some doctors now became concerned, and there was an increasing reluctance to prescribe them. So the pharmaceutical industry began to worry about its profits. It needed to take action. And, as they normally do in such situations they turned to medical science to help them preserve their most successful and profitable drug.

Scientists were recruited, (very carefully as we will see) and they produced a report that was published in the Lancet on 1st September 2016. "to help clinicians, patients, and the public make informed decisions about statin therapy for the prevention of heart attacks and strokes."

Basically, the report said that the benefits of Statin drugs were being under-appreciated, and the side effects were being exaggerated. Indeed, they found that the RCT evidence of the benefits were strong, and that the adverse events attributed to statins were not actually caused by them!

These findings were reported without too much critical examination by the mainstream media, and no doubt many people were re-assured. After all, medical science had spoken!

Yet this is a typical response of the pharmaceutical industry when profitable drugs begin to decline, when patients become more resistant, when even doctors are no longer willing to take the reassurances of the drug companies at face value, and are increasingly reluctant to prescribe them.

               It has happened in exactly the same way with HRT, and I wrote about it recently (August 2016) in this blog.

               And it happened in exactly the same way with MMR, when the vaccine was linked with Autism in the early 2000's. I wrote about this in September 2015.

• Find money for some more medical research on the drug. 
• Select the 'scientists' who are prepared to produce a report that refutes the doubts, and supports the efficacy of the drug. 
• Make sure that the academic foundations doing the work is well funded. 
• And make sure that their media allies publicise the new research!

So how was this Lancet report funded? Within the report, tucked away, there is a rather long 'declaration of interests' statement. This confirms that the 'Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit' (CTSU) at the University of Oxford received grants from some of the largest pharmaceutical companies, including Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Schering, and Solvay. There followed a long list of 'declarations of interests' by each of the reports authors, all "governed by University of Oxford contracts that protect its independence", of course

Most media accounts of this report, if they bother to mention these conflicts of interest at all, do so only in passing. For instance, the BBC Article, reports almost exclusively on the 'good news' of the report, leaving just a few short sentences at the end to indicate that there are critics of the report. Fiona Godlee, editor of the British Medical Journal, is quoted as saying that:

          "This still does not address the calls for a thorough, independent review of the evidence of statins. This is especially important in view of the guidance which recommends that large numbers of healthy people should take a tablet every day."

Then, London cardiologist, Dr Assem Malhotra, is quoted as saying that:

          "There are serious question marks about the reliability of industry-sponsored studies on the side effects of statins, and essentially that's what this review is. And a lot of the scientists involved in the original studies were involved in this review. It is not an independent review."

The Huffington Post published an article in April 2016 by Dr Assem Malhotra, entitled "The Great Statin Con", and this is well worth reading as it contains more on his experience and criticism of Statin drugs. (And certainly the BBC is never likely to publish them)!

So only those people who bothered to read to the bottom, the small print, of the BBC article would have got this message. This is typical of BBC News, and the mainstream media generally. They exist to do the bidding of the conventional medical establishment!

And worse is likely to follow. This report will now be used by the media to stifle any further discussion. Medical science has spoken! No counter arguments will be allowed for several years, until the evidence of Statin harm becomes overwhelming, and impossible to ignore.

Meanwhile, patients who have not been properly informed, will continue to take Statin drugs; they will suffer their side effects,'the pharmaceutical companies will continue to profit from them; diabetes, dementia, and other statin 'side effects' will continue to increase; and the NHS will be moved another step towards bankruptcy!

Well, that's how the conventional medical establishment works!

BBC News whitewashes Statin Drugs!

BBC News is always doing Big Pharma's advertising for them - free of charge. On BBCs 'Today' programme (17th May 2012) it was reported that even healthy (low-risk) people should be taking Statin drugs, and that by doing so, 1000s of heart attacks and strokes could be prevented. They quote evidence published in the Lancet.

So the millions listening to BBC News this morning will be left with the understanding that there are no problems taking Statin drugs.
* No mention of adverse reactions.
* No mention of Disease-Inducing-Effects (DIEs).
* No mention that Statins are now known to cause Diabetes.
* No mention of serious structural muscle damage.
* No mention of serious skin diseases.
* No mention of Prostate Cancer.
* No mention of heart disease.
* No mention of Arthritis.

It seems pointless to BBC News why they continue to remain quite ignorant about all this evidence? Or indeed to suggest they might like to look at this website - and indeed so many other websites from organisations that, unlike the BBC, are prepared to fully inform their readers and listeners. Or is the BBC merely content to propagandise for Big Pharma drug companies? Or is it just that your health correspondents are not doing their job properly?

Yet, look at the BBC News website. The same news is put forward here, that is, the benefits of taking Statins. But this also mentions at least some of the downsides of Statins. So BBC News is aware! I have to assume, therefore, that it is just not prepared to tell its listeners (and viewers?)

I wonder if the BBC has an explanation for this? Is it because BBC News is aware that their Radio and Television News broadcasts are listened to by millions, whilst their website is seen only by thousands. Does honesty at the BBC News, certainly in their health reporting, only stretch so far.

I notice this research has been published on the GP website, Pulse; with no mention of adverse reactions, other than the usual 'the benefits outweigh the disadvantages' argument. But there are some interesting comments. First, that "nearly all the trials and authors are subsidised by the Pharmaceutical Industry", and second, that "after more than two decades of statin use, heart disease appears to still be prevalent and statins are not having any noticeable effect on cardiovascular disease incidence rates".

But it is unlikely that BBC News will be very interested in such matters! But there is a further matter, why is BBC News, and other mainstream Media outlets, not putting forward other medical research that does not involve advertising for drug companies? If they are genuinely concerned about lowering blood pressure, cholesterol, and preventing heart attacks and strokes, this new research might be of interest. It was reported by the WDDTY magazine today.

"High-dose vitamin C lowers blood pressure, prevents stroke. Taking 0.5g of vitamin C – the equivalent of drinking six glasses of orange juice – every day lowers your blood pressure and reduces the risk of stroke.

The amount, which is around five times the recommended daily allowance, is especially effective in people already diagnosed with high blood pressure, or hypertension.

The vitamin can lower blood pressure by 5 millimetres of mercury, which is half as good as an ACE inhibitor or diuretic (water pill), in people with hypertension.  The immediate impact is a 3 millimetres fall, enough to reduce significantly the number of people who suffer a stroke, say researchers from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

The researchers think the vitamin works in a similar way to a diuretic, allowing the kidneys to remove more sodium and water from the body, and helping relax blood vessel walls.

The process suggests that vitamin C doesn’t directly reduce rates of cardiovascular disease, they caution.

Vitamin C is found in fruit and vegetables, and can also be taken as supplements.

(Source: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2012; 95: 1079-88).

It is becoming increasingly clear that Big Pharma drugs are dangerous. It is also becoming increasingly clear that diet, exercise, and other medical therapies, such as Homeopathy, are far safer, and more effective than conventional medical treatment. So perhaps the solution to many health problems can be a little simpler than taking pharmaceutical drugs.

But from this mornings evidence, we cannot rely on the BBC telling us this. Indeed, they don't seem to be in the least interested!