Here, I present just two of the many possible “unknowns” about the medications that are prescribed by health care providers:

1. The FDA requires two studies to show that a medication that is awaiting approval from the FDA is superior to a placebo — not exactly the best measurement of efficacy or the best reassurance that a patient is receiving the best medicinal treatment to restore their health. Equally surprising is that a pharmaceutical company that is attempting to approve such a medication has no limit as to the number of studies it can conduct to produce these two studies required. Some may show that their medicine, soon to be available for use by patients, is equal to a placebo, which it may not have any value, therapeutically.

2. When this newly approved medication is marketed to doctors immediately afterwards, statistical gymnastics are performed often by the pharmaceutical company marketing department. For example, blood pressure Drug A has been proven to provide a 50% relative risk reduction in heart attacks when patients are treated with this medication. Sounds impressive, huh? Lets take the same drug and state the following: Out of 100 patients studied, 2 patients experienced a heart attack who did not take Drug A, but when therapy was initiated with this medication, only 1 out of 100 patients experienced a heart attack. The first statement was designed to reflect relative terminology to state the benefits of the med, while the latter statement speaks in more authentic terminology, which is absolute terms. That’s marketing — taking a half truth and converting it into a complete fallacy.

Voltaire once said:

The art of medicine consists of amusing the patient while nature cures the disease.

There may be some truth to this…