interests etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
interests etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster

10 Nisan 2017 Pazartesi

No conflict of interests on pesticide advice | Letters

The assertion by Professor Dave Goulson (Farmers could slash pesticide use without losses, research reveals, 6 April) cannot go unchallenged. He says that pesticides are massively over-used because farmers are advised by agronomists working on commission to sell products.


The Agricultural Industries Confederation represents the majority of businesses that supply both agronomy advice and crop protection products to UK farmers. Farmers can elect to pay separately for agronomy advice and crop protection products. Farmers also have access to information from agrochemical manufacturers as well as independent agronomy research organisations – much of it free online. In many instances, those delivering advice do not receive commission.


The UK crop protection industry is focused on ensuring optimum, rather than maximum, use of crop protection products to ensure the farming industry delivers safe, wholesome and affordable food. It is a legal requirement that agronomists selling crop protection products are highly trained and kept up to date with agronomic developments to deliver advice to ensure efficient production and environmental protection.
Hazel Doonan
Head of the crop protection and agronomy sector, Agricultural Industries Confederation


• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com


• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters



No conflict of interests on pesticide advice | Letters

18 Temmuz 2014 Cuma

Statins advice to GPs is a victory for vested interests more than evidence | Kailash Chand

Statins could be prescribed to more men and women, with a smaller sized risk of heart condition, right after the NHS medicines watchdog lowered the bar for prescriptions.


Good (the National Institute for Overall health and Care Excellence) has issued advice that proposes lowering the cardiovascular primary prevention chance threshold – the degree of danger at which statins can be prescribed – from 20% to 10%.


Several believe that such advice would not have the self-confidence of the pros charged with its implementation. In Could a nationwide conference of general practitioners passed a unanimous movement calling for Good to recommend such adjustments only on the basis of a complete disclosure of trial information. This was followed in June by an unprecedented open letter to Wonderful from a variety of senior medical doctors and academics expressing four major areas of concern: medicating wholesome folks non-disclosed side-result information relying on market-funded statins trials and conflicts of curiosity within Good.


Nice is basing this advice on an examination of market-sponsored trials that might have exaggerated benefits whilst under-reporting harm. Most statins data is presented employing relative chance, which inflates benefit. For example, the heart safety review claimed a forty% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular disease, but the reduction in overall mortality was .3% per yr.


Concomitantly, the side-result information has been declared commercially out of bounds, leaving medics and individuals unable to evaluate the cost-advantage of these drugs.


I have been a GP for more than thirty years and prescribed statins with little concern, right up until I took statins myself for in excess of two years. I developed side-results like myalgia, backache and rest disturbance. I stopped taking statins and my signs and symptoms largely disappeared.


An intervention trial evaluating rosuvastatin unveiled that one particular in one hundred females taking a statin risked building type 2 diabetes at one.9 years. For these individuals the chance of contracting diabetes is roughly the same as the likelihood of keeping away from a non-fatal heart attack. For individuals with a minimal danger of cardiovascular illness, 130 men and women require to get statins for a 12 months to avoid just one undesired overall health outcome.


Wonderful describes itself as follows: “We offer independent, authoritative and proof-based advice on the most successful methods to avoid, diagnose and deal with ailment and unwell health …”


The health care occupation should hence assume Great to base its findings on full data disclosure and independently evaluated cost-benefit of statins. Nevertheless, it transpires that eight out of twelve people on the Wonderful guideline improvement group have ties to the drug organizations, and Wonderful is recommending this guideline on the basis of the Cholesterol Therapy Trialists Collaboration drug-business-funded trials. Nice simply asserting that is independent seems unconvincing.


At existing, it is estimated that about 7 million individuals in the United kingdom consider statins. If Great guidance is followed the number could enhance by numerous million. The evidence for the benefit in major prevention – ie preventing cardiovascular condition in men and women who do not have any diagnosed cardiovascular ailment – is weak.


Three-quarters of people having a 1st heart assault, for instance, have standard cholesterol amounts. According to the Planet Well being Organisation, 80% of cardiovascular illness is caused by smoking, inactivity, an unhealthy diet regime, and other way of life variables. Statins give the illusion of protection to numerous individuals who would be significantly much better served by merely strolling more and staying away from processed food.


Excellent medicine ought to usually be proof based and offered to the correct patient at the proper time. Statins have an important position in patients who have an current heart illness or have had a heart assault. Sufferers should be wary of these guidelines, and engage in meaningful dialogue with their medical doctor, just before deciding regardless of whether or not to medicate. If growing numbers of folks without having heart condition consider statins it will be a victory for vested interests more than proof.



Statins advice to GPs is a victory for vested interests more than evidence | Kailash Chand