How dumb can they get?

http://www.focus.de/gesundheit/ratgeber/medikamente/risiko/tid-24809/toedliche-schmerzmittel-verbieten-aspirin-und-paracetamol-gefaehrden-leben_aid_703225.html

(German language; in short it recommends to take medicine that causes strokes instead of Aspirin because Aspirin is soooo dangerous)

Different strokes for different folks?

the point they're making is not to gobble medicine down the way we generally have been, and that's a good point IMO. they recommend the new agents over the old and established ones, but in moderation.

If that was the point it would be ok, but they want to ban Aspirin because Ibuprofen and other stuff that gives you strokes is supposedly better.

I can't read the article but I am a doctor and I can say it is not that simple.

For one, aspirin isn't a magic cure against having a stroke. Stopping aspirin does not equal having a stroke.

All medicines have side effects and a signifcant one for aspirin in some people is bleeding (from stomach ulcers, in the brain which is another type of stroke etc.)

Again, don't know what the article is saying but perhaps they are just suggesting we balance the risk/benefit.

Actually, that is pretty much what the article is saying (about aspirin anyway, there is something more about the side effects of other painkillers, which *surprise* can cause liver and kidney damage if abused)

No, they say it is better to take Ibuprofen etc. than Aspirin.

Chances are it might be - if the risks of taking Ubuprofen are of a less critical nature and less likely to occur than those associated with Asprin. However as a dominantly english speaking site its tricky to review the content when many of us can't read german (and yes we can use google, but honestly it can butcher things beyond proper understanding)

they do, but the point they make is to take the newly developed agents in moderation. you won't risk a stroke that way.

as with all things, too much of a good thing is a bad thing.

I somehow miss the point of this article. All of those drugs are only sold in a pharmacy. The "clerks" is german pharmacies have a university degree and are required to inform you on the proper usage of drugs. My doc always recommended the "good old ibuprofen" whenever I needed pain medication (which is maybe once every 20 month). I didn't even knew why for a long time.

On second thought, iirc there was this Grippostat C ad in german TV that suggested using it preventative. So the article does make some sense for people doing that, I stand corrected. Except for Nutella. Sweet, sweet Nutella...

I used to think this too - that was until I either overdosed* on it or they changed the formula slightly - now I can't stand it :(


*ok ok poor pun - over indulged ;)

As Stephen Fry put it
"Too much of anything is bad for you. Too much is precisely the quantity which is excessive."

Well, they to say that 'smoking' was good for you too, it calms the nerves lol.

The article is from "focus", a magazine that is known for ... well ... simplifying things without sinking quite as deep as the yellow press. In a way, "focus" is the yellow press for people who don't want to associate themselves with the yellow press.

The article in question makes a valid point in stating that Aspirin does have its risks. This information is not only correct, it's also useful and important to spread, because far too many people still believe in the myth of Aspirin as a wonder drug that even prevents strokes (even though there's no scientific basis of that assumption). For several years, the some media articles even recommended taking Aspirin without any specific indication, just as an alleged "stroke prophylaxis", which is madness plain and simple.

The article then goes on to recommend other drugs like Ibuprofen, and thereby destroys the good impression that the first half of the article gives. It downplays the risks of Ibuprofen, doesn't even mention the potential for habituation and addiction, and provides only one argument: Ibuprofen were "better researched" than Aspirin. As a sole argument, this is of course rubbish, it's the _results_ of that research that would need to be compared to the risks Aspirin. Such methods of argumentation are also the reason why I don't like "focus" magazine: While the yellow press never tries to hide its primitivity, "focus" magazine presents the same stupid ways of reasoning in the veil of serious journalism, which is worse.

Of course, the title of this thread is yellow-press level spot on, since it misrepresents the original article in order to achieve a sensational punchline.

i could be wrong, and i certainly don't have any deep medical knowledge of the issue, but isn't Aspirin a 'blood-thinner', thus helping to prevent a stroke? how effectively, i have no idea, but isn't that at least the theory? similar to, say, black chocolate?