Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Guidelines pushing ‘epidemic of misinformation’ on to GPs, warns cardiology expert

GPs and patients are being put at risk by guidelines because of an ‘epidemic of misinformation’ generated by the pharma industry in collusion with the medical community, a leading cardiologist has warned.

In a packed session on clinical guidelines at Pulse Live this morning, Dr Aseem Malhotra, a consultant cardiologist in London, said: ‘The reality is we have an epidemic of misinformed doctors and misinformed patients.’

Dr Malhotra said this was the result of ‘biased scientific research and biased reporting in medical journals’, as well as commercial conflicts of interest, defensive medicine and lack of training for doctors in how to interpret the research data.

Dr Malhotra added: ‘Regulators fail to prevent misconduct by industry, and that doctors, institutions and journals with a responsibility to patients and scientific integrity collude with industry for financial gain.’

Highlighting the recent controversy over NICE’s decision to promote putting millions more patients on statins, Dr Malhotra said there were still huge doubts about the efficacy of the drugs and their real side-effects.

He said GPs should advise patients that even on the available evidence, the number needed to treat with statins to prevent or delay one death ‘is infinity’ as no benefit mortality has been shown, while a recent independent evaluation found the drugs were of no benefit – even for secondary prevention.

By contrast, Dr Malhotra said that a Mediterranean diet had been shown to have the best evidence for prevention in people with stable heart disease, ‘but nobody knows this’.

Also speaking at the session, Dr Dermot Ryan, a GP in Loughborough and honorary research fellow at the University of Edinburgh, criticised NICE’s approach to developing guidance – in particular for only including evidence from trials that ‘exclude 97% of patients’.

Dr Ryan added: ‘They construct guidelines from abstract evidence and then apply it to a population that was completely excluded from the trials.’

He called for a greater emphasis on pragmatic trials data, as well as for shared decision making in guidance to help GPs deal with the complex patients in their care.

Dr Zoe Norris, a GP in Hull and lead member of the campaign group GP Survival, warned the guidelines were preventing GPs from using their judgement and driving them to practise ‘defensively’ because of medicolegal fears.

Dr Norris said: ‘Clinical judgment is what we are meant to be using – and that does seem to be stressed more and more – but then our hands are tied by referral criteria.’

She added: ‘What worries me that no one is looking at the system, nobody is looking at the reality of implementing this on the ground.’

Speaking from the floor, Dr Adam Firth, Cheshire GP and advisor on the recently published NICE guidelines on end-of-life care, defended NICE’s processes for evaluating evidence which he said were ‘very transparent’.

He added that ‘shared decision making is referenced in every clinical guideline NICE produces’.

But GPs in the audience voted overwhelmingly in support of the question posed at the end of the discussion, ‘Is impractical clinical guidance putting patients and doctors at risk?’

 

Readers' comments (5)

  • What about the number needed to treat to prevent one Mi or stroke. Is this guy seriously saying that 4s woscops et al have shown no benefit from statins. I agree there are side effects and that a mediterranean diet would help.
    He should write an article for Pulse detailing all of this so that we can judge the evidence and his judgement of it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • David, 1 in 104, MI, 1 in 154 CVA, prevented!
    1 in 100 developed diabetes, 1 in 10 developed muscle damage.
    "No Lives saved"
    TheNNT.com
    Or I suggest you read The Great cholesterol Con by Dr Malcolm Kendrick

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • At least prescribed homeopathic medicines don't have side effects, are safe, and benefit people who have not been helped by usual medicines!
    Tried Everything Else, Try Homeopathy (TEETH)!

    Research shows Homeopathy is effective and safe in URTI's without problems of AntiMicrobial Resistance.

    http://facultyofhomeopathy.org/randomised-controlled-trials/

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Mr Mephisto

    Refreshing to hear that specialists disagree with the guidelines that we are expected to follow. I have been to quite a few meetings recently where the specialist speaker has fundamentally disagreed with the relevant NICE Guidelines.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Plenty of evidence not to prescribe statins. Where do you want to start?

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4513492/

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

IMPORTANT: On Wednesday 7 December 2016, we implemented a new log in system, and if you have not updated your details you may experience difficulties logging in. Update your details here. Only GMC-registered doctors are able to comment on this site.