Slashdot Mirror
Aspirin Helps Prevent Cancer, New Studies Show
kkleiner writes "For years, research has shown that aspirin is beneficial in preventing heart attacks. Now new studies support its ability to prevent cancer as well. The studies, involving tens of thousands of participants over many decades, show reductions of cancer incidence (both short- and long-term) and mortality rate as well as a decrease in metastatic cancer. It still is not known exactly how aspirin and cancer are connected, but those between the ages of 45-50 will now likely consider taking low-dose aspirin daily for the remainder of their lives."
100-Year Old Wonder Drug Now Shown To Prevent Cancer and Heart Attacks
Hmmm, that's odd, this "news" story reads like one of those ads trying to sell me something. Is this ancient Chinese secret or midwest housewife research?
For all the money spent on studies of aspirin, perhaps all the evidence anyone needs of its health benefits is the life of Walter Breuning, who lived to be 114 years old and aspirin was the only medication he ever took.
Oh, you just need a sample size of one? No need for that expensive tens of thousands double blind study, huh? And all he ever took was aspirin? We should refuse vaccines? And what the hell do you mean by "for all that money spent"? I find it odd that all three of the abstracts linked to in the article end with:
Funding
None.
Wait a second ... *checks URL*
singularityhub.com
Oh son of a bitch, it's more misinformation and half truths from Ray Kurzweil's disciples. Now I have to guess which is which.
My work here is dung.
It's also a good contraceptive, according to Rush Limbaugh.
Proverbs 21:19
I'd rather avoid aspirin and other NSAIDs (like tylenol/acetaminophen).
But then again...
A 2009 article published by the Journal of Clinical Investigation suggested that aspirin might prevent liver damage.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Experimental
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
it's actual, real life, scientific research - published in a well read and respected peer reviewed medical journal. But if it's just the messenger that has you all wee weed up, try PBS
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/jan-june12/aspirin_03-21.html
46 & 2
I'd rather avoid aspirin and other NSAIDs (like tylenol/acetaminophen).
Acetaminophen's not an NSAID, since it has hardly any anti-inflammatory effect at all. Still something that should IMO be avoided -- aspirin's actually a lot healthier and safer for most people -- but it's important to know what class of drugs you're actually dealing with.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
I was thinking of quitting smoking. Now I'll just take an aspirin with every cig. Problem solved!
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
it's actual, real life, scientific research - published in a well read and respected peer reviewed medical journal.
I've got no problem with the original research being legit. I have a problem with the original research showing that for this historical data it statistically linked aspirin to reducing the risk of cancer. It didn't show that these people who took aspirin were also more likely to take supplemental vitamins nor did it attempt to show exactly how the aspirin worked its "miracle." Was there a control group? You have to understand that the reason I'm "wee weeing" (whatever the hell that means) singularity hub is that they took totally legit level headed scientific research and they jumped all the way up to this:
100-Year Old Wonder Drug Now Shown To Prevent Cancer and Heart Attacks
Now let me ask you, where in the research did it "show" in anyway how this prevents cancer? And the article itself was only worse. It's a statistical study on historical data and from your PBS link, they did it right:
How Aspirin May Help Prevent Certain Kinds of Cancer
Do you see the difference here? These singularists or futurists or whatever the hell you want to call them take this, which is like 50% and bump it all the way up to 100% and make it a universal truth. Then they extoll this about how they're living until the end of time and people get caught up in this. It's ridiculous and, yes, I'm going to call this out when I see it. I do call that half-truths and I do call that misinformation. We can be more clear about this and the people PBS interview are.
That part about the 114 year old man? That wasn't misinformation? The lead in that that was all you need? I was out of line to get annoyed by that?
My work here is dung.
The mechanism, at least for colon cancer is known. Aspirin is COX 2 inhibitor. Colon and other cancers have COX 2 receptors on their cell walls. See details at: http://modernrecovery.com/news/7-latest/11-aspirin-reduces-colon-cancer.html
"Knowing everything doesn't help..."
There are doctors that are going as far as to state that most ailments (heart disease, cancer, arthritis, etc) are cause to some degree by chronic inflammation:
GIFY
https://encrypted.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=inflammation+and+disease&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Aspirin reduces inflammation and so helps in all things inflammation related.
You should check out diet related inflammation as some (if not most) of us have poor dietary habits OR eat to much.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflammation
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Acetaminophen's not an NSAID,
Furthermore, as far as I know, it's only Acetaminophen (Tylenol) that has been shown to potentially cause liver failure using regular 2 x 325mg doses, and only when taken with alcohol over a period of a few days. The articles I've read about liver failure from NSAIDs have been from using high(er) doses of Ibuprofen or Naproxen - both of which are stronger than Aspirin - continuously over a long period of time, like for arthritis pain control. But, IANAMD.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Aspirin is not harmless either. About 10,000 Americans a year suffer gastric bleeding due to aspirin. There is absolutely a tradeoff to be made here. Don't go on aspirin therapy without fully considering the risks.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I agree with you on a lot of points, but this study was more than just another correlation study like those that link high levels of vitamin D in subjects to reduced risks in cancer. This was a meta-analysis, which is meant to eliminate some of that bias by taking many studies (51 if I read correctly) and weighing them based on their merits and processes to look for statistical significance. Sure, it's not a perfectly executed double blind, but it's still an important study and the results shouldn't just be thrown out.
You've got this exactly backwards (unfortunately this was also about the only time you were 'exact' in your entire post).
So you essentially have no idea. But it being natural feels all warm and fuzzy so you will do that instead of basing your decisions off nasty pointy facts.
Or self-medicating with incorrectly dosed quanties of active drugs derived from an poorly regulated source.
Python coder | PyQt Applications | Writer