Why the Silence About LDN?

[Guest guest]

Pharmaceutical News by Press Release? (OR: Low Dose Naltrexone Study

Doesn't Make the News)

In the article, " Statins (Crestor) for Everyone? " , I wrote about how

the AstraZeneca-funded JUPITER study (JUPITER stands

for " Justification for the Use of Statins in Primary Prevention: an

Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin " ) made a case for putting

many more people on statins, especially on AstraZeneca's own Crestor.

In the article, I pointed out several troubling facts, including that

studies funded by pharmaceutical companies are much more likely to

have positive results than those that are not industry-funded, and

that many of the " news stories " about the JUPITER study reported " the

facts " of this study, almost word for word, as they appeared in

AstraZeneca's press release.

In her November 14, 2008 Columbia Journalism Review article, " Science

Reporting by Press Release, " Cristine calls this kind

of " reporting " the " dirty little secret of journalism. "

The subject came up recently in a conversation I had with Burt

Berkson, MD, PhD, pioneer in the use of alpha lipoic acid, and more

recently, of low dose naltrexone (LDN), as well, for treating some

very serious diseases and conditions -- without the side effects of

more toxic pharmaceuticals. Dr. Berkson was telling me that, at one

of the conferences he spoke at, LDN researcher Dr. Maira Gironi told

about the wonderful results she was having in Italy, reversing

multiple sclerosis with LDN. (You may read about Dr. Gironi's work

with LDN here, here and here.)

Dr. Berkson noted: " But you hear nothing about it because there are

no very wealthy corporations promoting it. "

His words brought to mind the fact that Dr. Gironi had presented a

paper on this study at the 60th annual meeting of the American

Academy of Neurology in Chicago, in April, 2008, around the same time

that I was interviewing several of the LDN patient and physician

advocates for my article, " Four Lifesaving Medical Treatments: Not

So `Anecdotal,' After All. " Everyone I spoke with was excited about

the very positive results Dr. Gironi was getting in Italy with LDN

for MS. They were eager for her paper to be presented at the AAN

meeting in Chicago.

Indeed, Dr. Gironi did present the paper on LDN. But, as Dr. Berkson

noted in our conversation, there were no big press announcements

about her paper.

So, I went online to see what had happened –- and why there was such

silence.

What I found was that, while there had been silence surrounding the

LDN study (which had no pharmaceutical company backing), at the same

conference one of Dr. Gironi's LDN co-investigators, Dr. Giancarlo

Comi, had also presented a paper on another MS drug, FTY720

(fingolimod). The research on this drug had been funded by the

pharmaceutical company, Novartis.

News stories about this pharmaceutical-company-funded

study/presentation abounded. The drug was called a " novel oral

therapy. "

But then, I began to notice something very curious: ALL the " news

stories " about fingolimod had the same identical wording, from

beginning to end.

I knew exactly where to go to learn where the wording had come from.

There it was, in the April 15, 2008 Novartis company press release,

titled " FTY720, a novel oral therapy in development for MS, shows

sustained benefits for the majority of patients after three years of

treatment. "

Then, I went to medicalnewstoday.com, which boasts that it is " the

largest independent health and medical news website on the Internet. "

Well, not so independent, after all -- because there it was, on the

very same date (April 15, 2008), a news " article, " titled -–

Surprise! -- " FTY720, a novel oral therapy in development for MS,

shows sustained benefits for the majority of patients after three

years of treatment, " with the same exact wording as the Novartis

press release.

And the same day, on www.bio-medicine.org, which purports to

contain " the latest biology and medical news, " this identically

titled article ran: " FTY720, a novel oral therapy in development for

MS, shows sustained benefits for the majority of patients after three

years of treatment. "

And again, it ran (same title, same wording) on biospace.com and on

World Pharma News -- and so it went, on many other " scientific "

sites, too.

Is this why the " big news " to come out of the AAN meeting was NOT

about low dose naltrexone, but rather, about a pharmaceutical company-

funded drug? What do you think?

To learn about how Big Pharma also writes (or commissions to have

written) the " scientific " medical journal articles about the

pharmaceuticals they " study " and manufacture, read Dr.

Abramson's Overdosed America and Melody sen's Our Daily Meds. In

addition, there is a wonderful PBS interview with Ms. sen, in

which she talks about this phenomenon (she says the pharmaceutical

industry calls it " publication planning " ).

http://tinyurl.com/the-silence-about-ldn

http://www.honestmedicine.com/2009/02/pharmaceutical-news-by-press-

release-or-low-dose-naltrexone-study-doesnt-make-the-news.html

[Guest guest]

Hi, I don't normally post to the group but I read the posts. I just ordered some Naltrexone from All Day Chemists in India so I can make some LDN. Has anyone here ordered from them? Was everything ok? I plan on doing my own trial and posting the results to my website at http://www.downrivermall.com/About_Muscular_Dystrophy.html

I appreciate any feedback

Greg