Beta blockers are busted – what happens next?

Beta blockers are busted – what happens next?

www.newscientist.com

They have treated heart disease for 40 years, but it now seems that beta blockers don’t work. What went wrong?

IT IS very rare for new evidence to question or even negate the utility of a well-established class of drugs. But after four decades as a standard therapy for heart disease and high blood pressure, it looks like this fate will befall beta blockers. Two major studies published within about a week of each other suggest that the drugs do not work for these conditions.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.consumerreports.org
www.news-medical.net

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Beta-blockers May Treat PTSD
Propranolol: The Drug That Everyone Will Be On.
BP medicine can reduce RACISM?
A pill to reduce bad memories?

Imperial Chemical Industries was once a mega-manufacturing chemical industry powerhouse of the British Empire. It's business success was often hailed as the "bellwether of the British Economy." It was a prime competitor of IG Farben and DuPont. It has long since been sold... but in it's history, a noteworthy "product" was invented and made commercially successful:

It was the first "Beta-Blocker" (Inderal) and at the time was heralded as one of the greatest medical advances of the 20th century - a treatment drug for angina in 1962. James Black (died 2010), later knighted "Sir" James Black (1981) and recipient of the "Order of Merit" (2000) received the Nobel prize for his invention in 1988.

According to his laudatory bio:

The beta blocker drug used to treat heart diseases such as managing irregular heartbeat, treatment of hypertension and protection of the heart after a cardiac arrest...

However, four or five decades later, it appears that there is something quite amiss....


Both The Journal of the American Medical Association as well as the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society seem to have almost simultaneously and independently published research results that indicate the drug does not work.

.. and yes, the media is reporting this as "surprising."

While the result held for the standard classes of heart drugs - statins, anticoagulants and antihypertensives - it did not for beta blockers. Regardless of whether or not patients stuck to their regimen, their risk of dying was the same. Taken together with the JAMA study, it becomes very reasonable to question the benefit of beta blockers for treating these conditions.

Ever inclined to cynical conspiracy; I must put forth that the source material waxes on about how there is nothing truly alarming about it taking so long to realize the ineffectiveness of one of the most widely prescribed types of drugs - a cash cow for the pharmaceutical industry ... they offer some interesting excuses like new techniques of treatment, and better drugs being developed....

But neither cross-confirming study was anything less than a statistical look at the effectiveness of the drug based upon outcomes; so while practically all the oversight agencies of government, every pharmaceutical producer of the 200 or so types of beta blockers, and any insurance company's actuarial table-calculating masterminds have always had access to the same data - we are apparently being 'told' that it is not ludicrous that billions upon billions have been 'charged' to patients for this 'landmark' drug - which never worked.

Further... as if to reaffirm the "support role" that media plays for the transnational corporate world, the following "tell you what to think" paragraph was crafted for our consumption:

What comes next is impossible to predict, but we may well be seeing a rare case of medical wisdom being overturned almost overnight. Beta blockers are not dangerous and have been in use for such a long time that it is unlikely that we will see an immediate cessation. But these results are hard to ignore, and cardiologists will be paying careful attention.

Notice: "Beta blockers are not dangerous and have been in use for such a long time that it is unlikely that we will see an immediate cessation."

Let's see..... BETA BLOCKER ASSOCIATED ADVERSE REACTIONS
en.wikipedia.org...

Adverse effects

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with the use of beta blockers include: nausea, diarrhea, bronchospasm, dyspnea, cold extremities, exacerbation of Raynaud's syndrome, bradycardia, hypotension, heart failure, heart block, fatigue, dizziness, alopecia (hair loss), abnormal vision, hallucinations, insomnia, nightmares, sexual dysfunction, erectile dysfunction and/or alteration of glucose and lipid metabolism. Mixed α1/β-antagonist therapy is also commonly associated with orthostatic hypotension. Carvedilol therapy is commonly associated with edema.[24] Due to the high penetration across the blood–brain barrier, lipophilic beta blockers, such as propranolol and metoprolol, are more likely than other, less lipophilic, beta blockers to cause sleep disturbances, such as insomnia and vivid dreams and nightmares.[25]
Adverse effects associated with β2-adrenergic receptor antagonist activity (bronchospasm, peripheral vasoconstriction, alteration of glucose and lipid metabolism) are less common with β1-selective (often termed "cardioselective") agents, however receptor selectivity diminishes at higher doses. Beta blockade, especially of the beta-1 receptor at the macula densa, inhibits renin release, thus decreasing the release of aldosterone. This causes hyponatremia and hyperkalemia.
Hypoglycemia can occur with beta blockade because β2-adrenoceptors normally stimulate hepatic glycogen breakdown (glycogenolysis) and pancreatic release of glucagon, which work together to increase plasma glucose. Therefore, blocking β2-adrenoceptors lowers plasma glucose. β1-blockers have fewer metabolic side effects in diabetic patients; however, the tachycardia which serves as a warning sign for insulin-induced hypoglycemia may be masked. Therefore, beta blockers are to be used cautiously in diabetics. [26]
A 2007 study revealed diuretics and beta blockers used for hypertension increase a patient's risk of developing diabetes, while ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers) actually decrease the risk of diabetes.[27] Clinical guidelines in Great Britain, but not in the United States, call for avoiding diuretics and beta blockers as first-line treatment of hypertension due to the risk of diabetes.[28]
Beta blockers must not be used in the treatment of coc aine, amphetamine, or other alpha-adrenergic stimulant overdose. The blockade of only beta receptors increases hypertension, reduces coronary blood flow, left ventricular function, and cardiac output and tissue perfusion by means of leaving the alpha-adrenergic system stimulation unopposed.[29] The appropriate antihypertensive drugs to administer during hypertensive crisis resulting from stimulant abuse are vasodilators such as nitroglycerin, diuretics such as furosemide and alpha blockers such as phentolamine.[30]

When you are told that you can trust these people with telling what is medical "fact" as opposed to "market-truth" remember this story....

I've included a link to the Consumer reports piece on comparing beta-blockers... which tells me much about the publication now... and also the obituary for Sir Black.

And by the way... does it not seem interesting that we are beginning to see many "new uses" for beta blockers... (see related threads)



www.newscientist.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by Maxmars


This caught my eye in the article you linked:

Which raises the question: why has it taken so long to find out? It is worth noting at this point that this is not yet another case of a drug entering the market only to be withdrawn later because of lack of efficacy or even adverse reactions which could have been noticed with longer or larger trials. It is simply a new medical revelation. The authors of the JAMA paper provide a reasonable explanation of the conflict between their results and earlier studies.

Why? Because there were millions to be made!

My Dad took these for a couple of decades until he died from, heart disease.

It makes me wonder how many lawsuits will come out of this discovery.

I was on them for a few years. I was always skeptical of their "treat everything" use. For one... the pills/amounts prescribed are often so small. It's hard to imagine them being able to have a large effect.

I am very interested in this study because the conventional wisdom for at least ten years is that if you quit beta blockers after being on them a while, well... look out! And the evidence that you will suffer without them has been presented 100x before. So who's lying?

I had a doctor that push on me a beta blocker until I gave up and took it, I never had depression before in my life until I took this drug to make things short, it was the worst side effects ever coming from a prescribe drug and I had my fair share of them

BTW it actually increased my blood pressure because the anxiety I developed.

You can not get off of them easily as they can cause a rebound effect and give you an actually hart attack.

I think this paragraph here is key to the article...

Damaged hearts are more prone to fatal irregular beats, and beta blockers are useful in controlling this. But with the advent of reperfusion therapy, people who survived heart attacks suffered less cardiac damage, so the frequency of fatal arrhythmias was lower. Put simply, the beta blocker effect was significant before the advent of this improved treatment, but the beneficial effect has since disappeared.

Prior to tthe above paragraph, again from the source...

The key word is "earlier". Most clinical trials on beta blockers took place before reperfusion therapy became standard treatment following heart attacks. Reperfusion involves opening the blocked artery by surgery or pharmaceuticals, and has been shown to significantly reduce damage to the heart.

So it looks as thought at some point, way back when, there was a benefit to be had, but this has since dissappeared, due to advent of other advances in medicine.

Although everyone will scream "conspiracy theory", the article you linked to actually gives an explanation.

But with the advent of reperfusion therapy, people who survived heart attacks suffered less cardiac damage, so the frequency of fatal arrhythmias was lower.
Put simply, the beta blocker effect was significant before the advent of this improved treatment, but the beneficial effect has since disappeared.

So yes, beta blockers *DO* work as described, but you wont see the benefit if you've also had the more recently invented treatments.

Originally posted by marg6043
I had a doctor that push on me a beta blocker until I gave up and took it, I never had depression before in my life until I took this drug to make things short, it was the worst side effects ever coming from a prescribe drug and I had my fair share of them

BTW it actually increased my blood pressure because the anxiety I developed.

You can not get off of them easily as they can cause a rebound effect and give you an actually hart attack.

Yea, I hear ya. I said "the amounts are small, how can they have a large effect" in my last post, but I was pretty zombified when on these. Another friend of mine who took them when she was younger -- she said they made her super depressed -- that she spent years doing nothing and feeling down. Arg.

As usual ... big Fpharma sells the lie... statins also bit the dust... they do worse than nothing.. while the real working med cost pennies on the dollar :
Vitamin C 4 grams a day + L Lysine 4 grams a day...

Pauling won a Nobel for it... get it and get better...

The scarist one is finding out certain aspects Chemo Therapy was falsified, but it still is being used .....

Turmeric works for lowering blood pressure as do cucumbers and celery. Curcumin is one of the reasons. You could also eat a chocolate bar or take a simple magnesium pill. Anything that relaxes the veins and arteries usually lowers blood pressure but this also has side effects that usually are harmless. If you have low blood pressure you wouldn't want to be eating too much mustard, it could go too low. We never did need those beta blockers, they blocked the ability of the body to process fat. They were thought to work by lowering spikes of energy if eating foods high in tyramines. This doesn't work well for most people because without the predecessor of adrenaline you also lose other necessary chemicals of the brain.

Need a Beta blocker, eat some beef or just drink a glass of milk. These both contain natural Beta blockers. The beef lasts a few days while the milk works fast but only lasts about four hours. They both contain Propanol type chemicals that are much more accepted by the body. Milk also contains some magnesium and calcium. They are not in the correct percentages for adults though.

Maybe we should just "Die quickly?"

reply to post by R_Clark


That information wouldn't apply to everyone, you could wind up with too much iron or a B12 deficiency depending on your diet. It will work for some people but not others.

Bloody hellfire.

My mate is on these right now. I better go see her and her fella, and show them the links to the original article. I will do that tomorrow, or possibly the next day.

This is terrible news for many millions of people. Masses of them, chugging chemicals that they have been expressly told will save thier lives!

Dirty, low down money headed scum!

reply to post by TrueBrit


Some people with a high metabolism can take them fine, if the liver function is excessive Beta Blockers can actually help a person to be calmer. If liver function is normal or slow, it can cause problems. That is also reliant on what a person eats. I think that high blood pressure is a result of too little copper or an imbalance of minerals. Copper is used to break down tyramines and adrenaline by the body, too much or too little and there are problems. There is also a problem with too much fluorides or Bromides in the body, both Iodine and Magnesium need to be working properly to use up some of these chemicals by creating usable energy. I can go in twenty directions with this ending up in high blood pressure.

reply to post by Maxmars


Thanks for this Maxmars,
One of my nearest and dearest has been on these for years.
Maybe a trip to the doctor is in order for him.

No sense in taking garbage that does more harm than good.

I was actually offered these drugs years back when I was in a high stress job,and suffered from skipping heart beats at night,but the idea freaked me out...so I opted for cutting back on the coffee,drank more fruit juice,and guess what-I was fine within two weeks.
Doc gave me the all clear.Never happened since.

But I could have been another years long customer for that drug,had I followed docs first orders.

As posted above by two people who actually read the full articles, Beta Blockers DID help and were proven to do so but new studies have found that they are not effective in light of new therapies such as reperfusion therapies.

Also, note that the disease studied is ischemic cardiac disease and the data still supports rate limitation with beta blockade in outflow obstruction and acute, rate associated ischemia.

No big conspiracy here, just medicine moving along with the times.

I was prescribed them for hypertension and severe palpitations. Being 34 and facing a life time of taking a medication I weighed my options. I hate medicine and only rarely even take tylenol or aspirin, so I definitely wasn't a happy camper.

I bought a bicycle and began riding it about 50 miles a week (it took a month or two to work up to that). After six months of being on the medicine I quit them. I also cut back on soda to about 2 to 3/week. I haven't had hypertension or a palpitation since and that was about 8 months ago.

JAMA Published study: β-Blocker Use and Clinical Outcomes in Stable Outpatients With and Without Coronary Artery Disease

Conclusion In this observational study of patients with either CAD risk factors only, known prior MI, or known CAD without MI, the use of β-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of composite cardiovascular events.

Emphasis mine.

I understand that we want to justify the use of the chemicals in question... but I feel we are missing a larger picture - especially in the area of personal perception and the ability of the human body to heal and regulate itself.

However my point was not that there was some 'fuzzy science' in the mix... it was that there appears to have been NO science in it. I mean, seriously? We are seeing exactly what beta blockers are NOT doing - have never done, and we are still thinking that it does work - or did?

The net result of the 40,000+ person long term study seems to speak for itself... yet some of you are insistent that there is 'another' way to look at this. Really? You must make it clearer for me how this conclusion is something other than "β-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of composite cardiovascular events."

Score one for the placebo effect?

Or just score a cool quadrillion for big pharma.

Shoot. Like it even matters any more.