The Neuro-Protective Lifestyle

I’ll See You In Health! Stephen Colbert Rebuts Ridiculous Crestor Claim

Posted on 18. Nov, 2008 by Kerry Friesen, M.D..

OZ: THE LAND OF INFINITE MEDICAL ANSWERS
(THAT DOESN’T EXIST)

What does it mean when Comedy Central becomes the voice of reason in all things medical?

Only that when you get to the Emerald City and pull back the curtain and discover the Wizard of Oz is really the Wizard of Biz and incapable of solving all of your problems (but more than willing to take your money), you have finally reached the realm of medical realism rather than some pharmaceutical fantasy land.

Despite all the media hype and medical experts claiming otherwise, the so-called pleiotropic effects of statins are not sufficient to cure cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, osteoporosis, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, aortic stenosis, cardiac myocyte hypertrophy or any other “trophy” for that matter.

Off-label applications excluded, all HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, in other words, “statins” are effective at lowering LDL cholesterol and raising HDL cholesterol (minimally)—but that’s it.

PHARMACEUTICAL FAIRY TALES

The AstraZeneca claims for Crestor however have to do with the inherent anti-inflammatory property of some statins.

Both vascular and neuro-inflammation are in fact critical risk-factors for cardiovascular and neurodegenerative disease. However, to suggest that everyone would benefit from taking Crestor is bad science and crass commerce.

There are better ways to reduce vascular inflammation. Taking a prescription medicine would be last on my list.

In a Wall Street Journal interview, AstraZeneca CEO David Brennan downplayed the commercial impact of the Jupiter study while simultaneously suggesting that analyst’s forecasts were “pretty bullish”.

Given our current economy, where will the estimated 10 billion additional health care dollars come from that it would take to implement the plan, enforce compliance and manage the inevitable adverse drug reactions?

And what if the expected health benefits are never realized?

OUR DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER ADVERTISING IDIOCRACY

Pharmaceutical companies spent an estimated $2.5 billion in 2000 on direct to consumer advertising and more than $4 billion in 2005.

In one year, prescriptions written for the 50 most heavily prescribed drugs increased by a whopping 25 percent compared to just 4 percent for all other drugs combined!

While direct-to-consumer advertising is illegal in Canada,it is nearly impossible to enforce.

Meanwhile here in America, pharmaceutical DTC advertising thrives in a virtually unregulated environment, emboldened by PhRMA, the lobbying group of the US drug industry.

THE PAL PROJECT AND THE “BITTER PILL” AWARDS

It has been left to watchdog groups (see PAL—the Prescription Access Litigation Project), to reign in the ridiculous.

For example, in 2006 both AstraZeneca’s Crestor and Pfizer’s Lipitor, received the coveted “Got Cholesterol?” award, given for “overpromoting expensive brand name statins,”.

A total of 5 of the country’s best selling drugs received “Bitter Pill” awards in 2006 for overly agressive and misleading DTC advertising.

That same year, AstraZeneca received a disciplinary letter from the FDA for a DTC advertising campaign claiming Crestor was more effective than other statins.

STEPHEN COLBERT AND THE COLBERT NATION: IS THE DOCTOR OF FINE ARTS IN?

Forget the Mayo brothers, if you need a sound dose of medical realism and a cheap second opinion, head straight to the office of Dr. Stephen T. Colbert DFA.

He may not have the bedside manner of a country doctor, but he at least has his medical facts right.

And except for Prescott Pharmaceuticals, Big Pharma doesn’t own him.

Continue Reading

How To Recession Proof Your Brain: The Emotional Side Of Money

Posted on 16. Nov, 2008 by Kerry Friesen, M.D..

“I have always been fascinated by the law of reversed effort.

Sometimes I call it the “backwards law.”

When you try to stay on the surface of the water you sink;
but when you try to sink you float.

When you hold your breath you lose it—”

Alan Watts—
The Wisdom Of Insecurity

Inside The Head Of An Iconoclastic Psychoneurocosmetologist

HOW TO MAKE A DECISION: SERVING SIZE 1—1,000

In a cranial-sized cake pan, combine one ounce of amygdala with 1/2 cup of limbic system, funnel through the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and bake at 37 degrees for a millisecond or so. Add a pinch of social intelligence, a hint of basal ganglia and voila’—one decent decision!

Or is it?

TO FEEL OR NOT TO FEEL:
TWO BIOLOGY OF BUSINESS SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT

No neuroscientist will deny that emotion is an inevitable aspect of real-life decision making. The question has always been whether an individual’s emotional response when faced with uncertainty will facilitate or decimate the process.

Now, contrary to the popular misconception that “cooler heads prevail”, recent studies seem to suggest a more emotionally intense intuitive model for financial decision making may be best.

This is the brave new world of neuroeconomics.

An eclectic blend of neuroscience, economics and experimental psychology, where being emotional is NOT the same as irrational.

THE CENTER FOR NEUROPOLICY

At the Center For Neuropolicy at Emory University, Dr. Greg Berns M.D., distinguished professor of neuroeconomics and psychiatry and author of the recently released, Iconoclast: A Neuroscientist Reveals How to Think Differently (Harvard Business School Press, 2008), uses a combination of computational and functional neuroimaging techniques to explore the neural basis for decision making and human interaction.

If that makes you nervous, remember while we sleep, experimental economists are busy rewriting the financial framework we have all been programmed to live within. Given the current economic crisis, can you really blame them?

Not to worry, here are 4 points to help recession proof your brain:

1. Go with your gut
Your emotional response to a cost-benefit analysis or any financial decision will constitute a “somatic marker“, a visceral measure of “body sensations” as it were to help guide you the next time you are faced with a similar decision.

2. Emotions are information too
Decision making involves assessing all types of information cognitive and otherwise.
Embracing a particular emotion rather than resisting it, places it squarely in the realm of information and assists in the discriminating process.

3. Few decisions are truly individual
Emotional and social intelligence shape the social context that decisions are made within.
Corporate decision making is a good example. The complexity of decision making in the corporate environment is mind-boggling—the best approach is to accept the fact that you are indeed being influenced by outside forces.

4. Failure is not to be feared
Remember our sense of “ownership” is really nothing more than a self-perpetuating delusion. Change is an inevitability—financial status included. Sometimes, “Losing Everything Can Finally Mean Beginning”.

Continue Reading

Incessant Blog Reading Triggers Near Insanity: Scientists Baffled

Posted on 07. Mar, 2008 by Kerry Friesen, M.D..

Incessant blog reading or “inbleading”, apparently has its consequences. “Bleaders” (incessant blog readers) net-wide, are reporting irrational behavior and brief memory lapses following extended periods of extreme blog hopping.

Of course that is all made up. But before you sail away, ask yourself, “just how well is my brain able to discern the difference between the stupid and the stupendous, the credible and the incredulous”? From the brain’s perspective, the more outlandish and crazier the claim is, the greater the curiosity! Even the exclamation point at the end of the last sentence has you wondering, “did I just read/hear/see that right”? Don’t worry, the “Scientists Baffled” comment gets everyone too. Welcome to the wacky world of Neuromarketing, the branch of neuroscience that concerns itself with the brain’s “buy button” and various hidden subliminal “switches”.

Neuroimaging studies are now quite definitive about where basic beliefs like “do fish swim?”, “is the pope Catholic?”, get processed in the brain. That’s the job of the ventromedial PreFrontal Cortex (vmPFC). A rather unremarkable area near the front of the brain towards the midline.

Things like uncertainty and error detection however, “light up” a whole other area of the brain known as the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). The ACC in turn, has direct output connections to the basal ganglia. Interpretation? That “gut feeling”, that intuitive sense of the believable or unbelievable governed by something we call common sense–well, it’s real! In fact, a finely tuned connection between the anterior cingulate cortex and the basal ganglia may be the basis for someone’s uncanny ability to discern the truth given conflicting facts (the headline of this post for example.) It may also help explain why some people react with a very guttural sense of disgust when confronted with a lie. It just doesn’t “feel” right.

Gerald Zaltman Ph.D., a member of Harvard University’s interdisciplinary initiative, “Mind, Brain, and Behavior”, believes that 95% of consumer decision making occurs subconsciously. Dr. Zaltman is recognized as one of the nation’s top five marketing scholars and holds patents in the area of neuroimaging and neuromarketing. But can you really be “made” to believe something that isn’t believable? Can subliminal messaging subvert your subconscious? Not unless you let it.

When it comes to marketing, “neuro” or otherwise, honesty is still the best policy. Confirming marketing nonsense with crazy headlines is after all, just a psychological gimmick with no real lasting power. Deception is nothing more than denying what “is”. Understanding the mind of your market…well that’s another matter entirely. Cognitive sciences combined with nanotechnology will continue to give birth to strange new disciplines. My advice…start fine tuning your ACC/Basal nuclei interneurons. In other words, “go with your gut” cause’ the fun has just begun…so-to-speak.

Continue Reading