The costs of doing drug business?

Here's a telling situation.

Liz had been on prescription niacin, Niaspan, 1500 mg per day (3 x 500 mg tablets) for several years to treat her severe small LDL pattern and familial hypertriglyceridemia (triglycerides 500-1000 mg/dl). Because her health insurance had been paying for the "drug," she insisted on taking the prescription form.

A change in insurance, however, meant that the Niaspan was no longer covered. Her pharmacy wanted to charge $227 per month.

Liz came to the office in tears, worried that she was going to have to choke up $227 per month. I reminded her that, as I had told her several years ago, she could easily replace the Niaspan with over-the-counter Sloniacin or Enduracin. Both release niacin over approximately 6 hours, just like Niaspan.

Here are the prices I've seen with Sloniacin, 100 tablets of 500 mg:

Walgreens: $15.99
Walmart: $12.99
Costco: $8.99

So the most expensive source, Walgreens, would cost Liz just under $15.99 per month to take 1500 mg per day.

$15.99 versus $227.00 per month for preparations that are highly similar. Hmmmmmm.

I wonder what the $211.01 extra per month goes towards? Admittedly, Abbott Labs, the current company selling Niaspan (after Abbott acquired Kos), has invested in a few clinical trials, such as ARBITER-HALTS6. But does supporting research justify this much difference, a difference that amounts to $2532 over a year? If just 100,000 patients are prescribed Niaspan at this dose (a typical dose), this generates $253 million.

Is the cost of developing and marketing a supplement-turned-drug that great? Is this justifiable? Is it any wonder that our health insurance premiums continue to balloon?

I use Sloniacin and Enduracin almost exclusively.

Comments (28) -

  • Brent

    1/5/2011 11:12:42 PM |

    Is Sloniacin safe to use without a doctors supervision?  (I have low LDL, but it is almost all "B" particles. Triglycerides are pretty close to target range.)  What dose do you usually start patients out at?

  • Anonymous

    1/6/2011 12:01:03 AM |

    Could someone please explain how Abbot and Glaxo Smith Kline obtained patents for Niaspan and Lovaza? And why doctors prescribe these when essentially the same things are available over the counter?

  • Tx CHL Instructor

    1/6/2011 12:27:43 AM |

    I wrote up an article on my blog illustrating my experience with the healthcare industry back when I was trying to earn a living as an insurance peddler. See http://chl-tx.com/2009/09/how-to-get-the-best-deal-on-health-care/

  • Basil

    1/6/2011 12:56:24 AM |

    I hate how the drug companies cry about how much they spend on research.  Most research is funded by government grants with the bill footed by the taxpayer.  Then they make us pay for it again when we purchase the drugs.  What a scam.

  • terrence

    1/6/2011 1:01:59 AM |

    I paid a lot less than $5 for 100 tabs of house brand Niacin at Safeway(aka Vons, Randalls).

    I took 1,500 mg for several months. I got a warm flush for 15 to 20 minutes that was bad at all. My LDL went way down after a few months, and HDL went up a bit.

    Cheap is good, if it works.

  • terrence

    1/6/2011 1:14:30 AM |

    Typos, typos, typos...

    I paid a lot less than $5 for 100 tabs of [500 mg] house brand Niacin at Safeway(aka Vons, Randalls).

    I took 1,500 mg [a day] for several months. I got a warm flush for 15 to 20 minutes that was [NOT] bad at all. My LDL went way down after a few months, and HDL went up a bit.

    Cheap is good, if it works.

  • Travis Culp

    1/6/2011 1:52:42 AM |

    At least she didn't insist on the name-brand like that Lovaza guy.

  • Anonymous

    1/6/2011 2:59:53 AM |

    Be careful with switching.

    Be careful with liver effects.

    http://cholesterol.emedtv.com/niacin/types-of-niacin-p2.html

  • Anonymous

    1/6/2011 3:17:22 AM |

    I was trying niacin supplements, and I started out with 500 mg each morning, which initially caused uncomfortable flushing. The flush got less uncomfortable over the next few weeks, and then I added another 500 mg at bedtime. The flush came back, but gradually got less uncomfortable over the next week, and then BAM!!! I suddenly started getting the worst headaches I have ever had. A couple of ibuprofen would make the headache bearable, and I did not immediately associate the headaches with the niacin, since the onset of the headaches was several days after I upped the dose to a gram a day. The headaches persisted, and after the 3rd day of those horrible headaches, I decided it had to be something I changed recently, and the niacin was the only thing that made sense.

    So I omitted the niacin complete the next day. No headache. Ok, since I had taken 500mg for several weeks without getting headaches, I took 500mg the following day -- BAD HEADACHE. I divided the tablets using a pill-splitter to get a 250mg dose -- BAD HEADACHE. Nuts. I cut it out completely, no headache.

    I get about 50mg of niacin in a multi-B-vitamin tablet without headache, but I wonder if I have somehow sensitized myself to niacin, which would mean that I won't be able to get the cholesterol effects I was after.

    I'm also wondering if maybe there is some interaction between the niacin and some other vitamin or mineral (or food). I haven't taken any of the 500mg pills for over a week (no headaches at all during that time), and I may try 250mg tomorrow morning (and carry a dose of ibuprofen with me just in case). But I'm interested in seeing if anyone else has had a similar experience.

  • Anonymous

    1/6/2011 6:13:12 AM |

    Niacin can do wonders. In the distant past I used it to control and stop knee pain which had troubled me for several years. A true life saver given what NSAIDs were doing to the stomach.
    In time, it apparently caused the heart
    to start skipping beats. In rare persons, it may cause myopathy of the heart muscle; therefore, I stopped it.
    And when higher than 100 mgs per day
    are reintroduced the heart starts to
    skip beats again even years later.
    I am not saying don't use it but it can have side effects so be alert. There are
    alternatives to niacin if it doesn't fill the bill. For example pantethine and fenugreek seed for blood lipids and fish oil, boswellia, and MSM/DMSO2/dimethylsulfone for joint pain.


    Trig

  • Coach Rollie (FX)

    1/6/2011 6:54:28 AM |

    Is there a big difference between big drug companies and street drug dealers.  Hmm.

  • Anonymous

    1/6/2011 1:27:21 PM |

    Be careful of timed release niacin...can cause jaundice.

    I think consumers in the EU recently lost the right to use herbs/supplements (?)...coming to the US soon?

    Very important that we protect drug company profits...since main street is going down the tubes?  Wink

  • Dr. William Davis

    1/6/2011 3:34:14 PM |

    Brent--

    I believe that, ideally, any form of niacin is best taken under supervision.

    That said, it is sad to realize how few healthcare practitioners actually know or care about using niacin. The only reason there is some awareness is because of, of course, drug industry marketing of Niaspan.

  • Kent

    1/6/2011 6:04:20 PM |

    Thanks Doc,

    I am curious as to the release time you have given on Sloniacin. Is that release time you quoted from the manufacturer?  

    From what I gathered there were 3 types of Niacin, imediate release (IR), extended release (ER), and slow release (SR). With Niaspan and Enduracin being in the (ER)camp and Sloniacin being in the (SR) camp, being a bit harsher on the liver.

  • polacekt

    1/6/2011 7:09:04 PM |

    Kent,
    There is no clinical differentiation between SR and ER.

    Kos funded a dissolution study comparing Niaspan and 7 non-prescription niacin products labeled as SR or Timed-Release, including Endur-acin and Slo-Niacin. The results were graphed and compared, and Niaspan was the slowest, with Endur-acin virtually identical.  slo-niacin was a bit quicker.

    Kos and Abbott have gone to great lengths to perpetuate the myth that the Niaspan dissolution is unique, that non-prescription products are longer acting, and therefore more hepatotoxic.  The reality is if you dose them once daily like Niapsan, you have the same kinetics and dynamics. Dosing twice daily makes them easier to tolerate, but means that one must be more careful in determining you max dose before liver enzyme elevation occurs - hence physician monitoring especially during the dose escalation period.  For many ER niacin users dosing twice daily, 1500mg is a total max daily dose.  With respect to results (dynamics) the twice daily regimen increases the LDL response, but lowers the HDL response somewhat as compared to ER once daily.
    So how you take it may also depend on your lipid goals and what else you are taking.  
    I can tell you first-hand, that the majority of the medical community is not aware of this published dissolution data, or the pharmacodynamic differences in dosing regimen.
    Any one who receives push-back from their physician should provide them with the article, "Dissolution Profiles of Extended Release Niacin...." American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 2006

  • Anonymous

    1/6/2011 10:46:53 PM |

    Good info. Does anyone know of a doctor in Sioux Falls, SD that is up to date on this and other treatments/tests that Dr. Davis discusses on this blog? My current GP doc has no idea on much of this.

  • polacekt

    1/6/2011 11:01:38 PM |

    your best bet is to find a certified lipidologist.  go to learnyourlipids.com and put your city and zip in.  it will tell you there are several near you.

  • Anonymous

    1/6/2011 11:14:26 PM |

    Here is a start to self education but it is best to Pubmed all of these issues; just enter Niacin and then start reading. Sometimes all you need is to read "conclusion." Very well organized. pubmed.org

    I read it for the fun of it. Is pubmed everything we need to make informed choices? Nope, not at all, but like I said, it is a good solid start.

    Dissolution profiles of nonprescription extended-release niacin and inositol niacinate products.
    Poon IO, Chow DS, Liang D.

    College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Texas Southern University, Houston, TX 77004, USA.

    Abstract
    PURPOSE: The dissolution profiles of nonprescription extended-release niacin and inositol niacinate products were studied using the prescription extended-release niacin, Niaspan, as a reference.

    METHODS: Seven nonprescription extended-release and 12 nonprescription inositol niacinate products were collected from community and online pharmacies in the United States. Extended-release Niaspan was used as a reference. Dissolution profiles were examined by the United States Pharmacopoeia dissolution test, using a paddle method. Release samples were removed every 30 minutes for up to 240 minutes. Niacin was quantified by high-performance liquid chromatography.

    RESULTS: Ten out of the 12 inositol niacinate products were capsules and 6 of the 7 extended-release formulations were tablets. During the initial 30-minute dissolution study of inositol niacinate products, free niacin was released to various degrees. One product achieved fast dissolution, with >30% cumulative release of niacin. The cumulative percentage of niacin released at 240 minutes of all inositol niacinate products was statistically different (p < 0.0001). The majority of these products reached a plateau of releasing niacin in one to two hours, which was maintained until the end of the study. Six out of the seven extended-release niacin products had extended-release profiles. Five products showed a statistically higher dissolution rate (p < 0.05) than that of Niaspan.

    CONCLUSION: Significant variations in dissolution profiles were noted among the 7 nonprescription extended-release and 12 nonprescription inositol niacinate products in vitro, and their dissolution rates were not comparable to that of the prescription extended-release niacin. Further studies are warranted to correlate such dissolution data with their in vivo efficacy.

  • Jason A.

    1/7/2011 3:22:52 AM |

    Alot I read online says to use IR niacin to avoid liver toxicity, which can occur with slow release. Any thoughts on the issue? Any brand recommendation for IR niacin? Thank you.

  • Samual

    1/7/2011 5:43:08 AM |

    Its a great Blog. Medical tourism, which is the practice of traveling from one place to another for medical care, is no longer limited to patients seeking conventional treatments and thus leads to Pancreatic cancer treatment India.

  • Anonymous

    1/7/2011 12:49:10 PM |

    I bought a bottle of 1,000 tabs of 500 mg IR Niacin, Rugby brand, for about $29, shipped. I'm at 2 a day with modest and very manageable flushing most of the time. I've only been at the full dose for about two months so I don't yet know the results but I'm due for preliminary bloodwork soon. IR niacin is supposed to be the least hepatotoxic and most effective for most lipid parameters (LDL excepted). It is certainly the cheapest.

    For those going this route, don't jump in with 500 mg a day right off. Get a bottle of 100 mg and work up slowly. I started with 50 mg and went up 50 mg every two weeks.

    If it turns out I need 1,500 a day and the flushing becomes unmanageable I might go to Slo-Niacin.

  • Anonymous

    1/8/2011 6:32:59 AM |

    Dr. Davis, can you please explain how the money for insurance premiums goes to drug companies?

  • polacekt

    1/8/2011 6:53:17 AM |

    Anonymous, Why are you anonymous?

  • Stargazey

    1/8/2011 3:21:48 PM |

    Is the cost of developing and marketing a supplement-turned-drug that great?

    Yes. Have you ever performed a drug trial? The paperwork is mind-boggling. It costs millions to create a protocol, get it approved, recruit sites, recruit patients, monitor sites, collect data, follow up adverse reactions, compile the data and resolve queries about how the data was entered.

    And if the FDA has significant objections or questions about what you've done, you get to do another trial to resolve those issues.

    All of that has to happen before the first ad goes on paper. I'm not saying the FDA's procedure is wrong, but it costs mega-millions to do it.

  • Anonymous

    1/8/2011 11:43:20 PM |

    Great post, Dr. Davis.  My doctor strongly advised me to take Niaspan to lower my triglyceride levels which were 240.  I asked her about Slo Niacin because it was so much less expensive, and she recommended against it b/c it's not regulated and you don't know how much of the medicine you are really getting in OTC form.  So I took the Niaspan and 6300 mg fish oil for 3 months and it did lower my triglycerides to 112.  I also cut out bread and most other bad carbs - pizza, potatoes, sweets other than dark chocolate.

  • Anonymous

    1/9/2011 8:00:56 AM |

    There's a kernel of truth to the concern that OTC/supplement products are not as well regulated as pharmaceuticals, but it's a concern that's WAY overblown by the medical profession and the drug companies who train most of them these days.

    For one thing, the pharm drugs are not as well regulated as many assume. There's not an FDA inspector running or overseeing tests on every batch that goes in a bottle. Plenty of problems come to light still despite staggering fines levied by the FDA.

    Second, the supplement industry is no longer run by hippies stuffing capsules in a garage in Northern California. It is a big-money industry with plenty of good chemists and equipment and manufacturing standards both voluntary and regulatory. It can take a bit of research, but there are plenty of good products out there. For many things like Niacin, the OTC versions are available from generic drug producers with very long track records of quality.

    Lastly, for most applications like lipids, the proof is in the numbers. If we're talking about digoxin, yes, it makes a huge difference if delivery isn't controlled down to the microgram. With niacin, honestly, what difference does it make if you get 520 mg one day and 485 the next? None. If the product is fairly tight, you'll get consistent results with your lipid numbers.

  • Simply Natural FX

    1/10/2011 11:42:29 AM |

    I was taught that for the best results you take the full spectrum of vitamin B's, never separate them. If you take only one you create an imbalance that causes problems with the levels of the remaining B's.
    My question is why the obsession with lipids, target ranges and having good numbers? The only true test is in how you are doing. Why the extra strain, is this to be healthy or avoid getting sick? There is a difference. What is the true goal here?
    The whole cholesterol thing was never a proven problem, but an assumption that has been used to make billions of dollars trying to get the levels down, with no evidence that doing so is in any way helpful, but the means to lowering the count has proven harmful. I see worrying about reaching certain levels, as unneeded stress, which is bad in and of itself.
    If it's toxic to take too much, why strive for higher levels when getting the flush is a sign you've got enough in your system already?
    Cost aside, getting the right kind of vitamin is more important, the natural vs the artificial, the best absorption rate.

    Life is balance, the body strives for it, knows how to get it, just needs the materials to do it best for you.

  • Anonymous

    1/27/2011 1:22:28 AM |

    It's an absolute shame that the FDA is going after Sloniacin for speaking the truth.
    http://bit.ly/eebWnM

    Sloniacin has to remove all references to cholesterol, lipids, statins etc. from their website, brochures and product label. Sloniacin has already shut down their website.

    I don't need this product, but I feel for the folks on fixed incomes who won't know about this cheap alternative to Niaspan.

    I want to scream.

Loading
Is health the absence of disease?

Is health the absence of disease?

It sounds like a word game, but is health the absence of disease?

In other words, if you're not sick, you must be well. If you don't have cancer, heart disease (overtly, that is, like angina and heart attack), the flu, diarrhea, fevers, pain someplace . . . well then, you must be well.

Of course, most of us would disagree. You can be quite unhealthy yet have no overt, explicit disease. Yet this is the philosophy followed in conventional medicine when it comes to many aspects of health.

With regards to heart disease, if you have no chest pain or breathlessness, you don't have heart disease. "Oh, all right, we'll perform a stress test to be sure." Track Your Plaque followers, as well as former President Bill Clinton, recognize the enormous pitfalls of this approach: It fails to identify the vast majority of hidden heart disease. In heart disease, the apparent lack of overt, sympatomatic "disease" does NOT equal the true absence of disease, even life-threatening.

How about nutritional supplements? Vitamin D is a perfect example. Blood levels of vitamin D of 10 ng/ml--profound deficiency--are common, yet people feel fine. Beneath the surface, blood sugar rises because of poor insulin response, hidden inflammatory responses are magnified, HDL is lower and triglycerides are higher, coronary plaque grows at an accelerated rate, colon cancer activity is heightened . . . Though you feel fine.

Can an abnormal "endothelial response" be present while you feel fine? You bet it can. This refers to the abnormal constrictive behavior of arteries that is present in many people who have hidden coronary plaque or risk for coronary plaque, but is entirely beneath consciousness.

How about a triglyceride level of 200 mg/dl, fatally high from the Track Your Plaque experience? (We aim for <60 mg/dl.) This is typical in people who follow the diets endorsed by agencies like the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association, organizations too eager to keep the money flowing from corporate sponsors and thereby offer us their advice based more on politics and less on health. Triglyceride levels of 200 mg/dl cause no symptoms.


At so many levels, the absence of disease is NOT the same as health. Health is something that is expressed by, yes, feeling good, but it's also measured by so many other factors hidden beneath the surface. An annual physical is one lame effort to address this aspect of "health." But it needs to go farther, much farther.

Heart scan, lipoprotein testing, vitamin D blood level--those are the basic requirements to go beyond the shortsighted practice of the conventional approach in the world of heart disease.

Comments (2) -

  • John

    10/1/2007 6:33:00 AM |

    Thanks for this information.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 3:49:52 PM |

    How about a triglyceride level of 200 mg/dl, fatally high from the Track Your Plaque experience? (We aim for <60 mg/dl.) This is typical in people who follow the diets endorsed by agencies like the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association, organizations too eager to keep the money flowing from corporate sponsors and thereby offer us their advice based more on politics and less on health. Triglyceride levels of 200 mg/dl cause no symptoms.

Loading
Does the American Heart Association diet reduce heart disease?

Does the American Heart Association diet reduce heart disease?

If you have a heart attack and land in the hospital where, invariably, you will have a heart procedure. Or, if you get a stent or coronary bypass operation, sometime before your discharge from the hospital, a well-meaning hospital staff dietitian will provide instruction in the American Heart Association (AHA) diet.

Does this diet reduce the risk of heart disease?

The answer depends on where you start. If you begin with a conventional American diet that is enormously influenced by convenience, food manufacturers like Nabisco, General Mills, Quaker Oats, ADM, and Cargill, or food distributors like McDonald’s, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell, then the American Heart Association diet is indeed an improvement. But just a small one. If LDL cholesterol is the yardstick, the average reduction in LDL is between 10 and 15 mg/dl. This is the same amount of change you’d experience by adding 1 tablespoon of oat bran to your diet. Hardly worth boasting about. HDL, triglycerides, blood glucose, and body weight do not change.

The diet could be substantially better. After all, it’s become common knowledge that other diets, such as the so-called Mediterranean diet, the South Beach Diet, and similar broad projects result in far greater changes than the AHA diet dispensed by your hospital and cardiologist. These diets more effectively reduce LDL, raise HDL, reduce triglycerides, reduce C-reactive protein, reduce blood pressure. Diets like South Beach also yield substantial weight loss and reversal of diabetic tendencies, with the magnitude of benefit dependent on the amount of weight lost.

Why this stubborn adherence to the outdated concepts articulated in the AHA diet? Cardiologists would argue that insufficient data has been generated to permit widespread application of these diets. They also differ on whether they really work. Of course, the majority remain ignorant and dismiss them as fad diets.

A little digging into the financial disclosures of the AHA suggests another, more malignant influence: who is paying the bills? Until recently, drug manufacturers were major contributors to the AHA. However, more recently AHA administrators have become sensitive to the public perception that they might be nothing more than a voice box for the drug industry. They have since limited contributions from the drug companies to 8% of annual charitable revenues.

The drug manufacturers have been replaced by the food industry. In addition to food manufacturers that make the cereals on your grocery shelf, it includes the multi-national conglomerates that produce unimaginable revenues and carry enormous political clout, like ADM and Cargill. Ever wonder how it is that Honey Nut Cheerios received a “Heart Healthy” endorsement from the AHA?

The AHA diet does not provide the answers we’re looking for, not even close. It is a perversion from an organization that has its strings pulled by industry. The answers to health will not come from the AHA, AMA, the American College of Cardiology, the American Hospital Association, and it won’t come from your doctor. It won’t come from a titillating report on the evening news or Good Morning America. It will come from collective and expanding wisdom placed directly into the hands of the public. It will be untainted by the temptation of drug industry dollars. It will not be dirtied by million dollar contributions, or the multi-million dollar behind-closed-doors lobbying of the food manufacturers. It will come from the truth relayed to the healthcare-consuming public. I hope you recognize it when you see it.

If you want a healthy diet for your heart, throw away the pamphlets from the AHA unless you are partial to bread, breakfast cereals, corn, and the supporters of their misguided nutritional advice.
Loading
More on "Bio-identical hormones" and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals

More on "Bio-identical hormones" and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals

In October 2005, Wyeth petitioned the FDA, requesting that it completely ban the bioidentical alternatives that women have been using in ever-increasing numbers to achieve optimal hormone balance. With bioidentical replacement therapy clearly reducing its market share, Wyeth asked the FDA to outlaw all compounded bioidentical hormone formulations that compete with its own discredited drugs. If Wyeth is successful, then menopausal women will have no choice other than to take potentially life-threatening hormone drugs or to forgo hormone replacement therapy altogether, thus enduring the physically and emotionally debilitating effects of menopause-induced hormone depletion.

Dave Tuttle
Life Extension Magazine
August, 2006



For more commentary on Wyeth Pharmaceutical's outrageous and brazen petition to the FDA to bar prescription "bio-identical" hormones, i.e., hormones that are identical to natural human forms, read Life Extension's article, Health Freedom Under Attack!
Drugmaker Seeks to Deny Access to Bioidentical Hormones





This well-researched article is in the August, 2006 issue of Life Extension Magazine. The article can also be accessed online at http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2006/aug2006_cover_attack_01.htm

or go to www.lef.org and click on the August, 2006 issue.

The author, Dave Tuttle, details the baseless arguments raised by Wyeth, a pathetic and amazingly selfish act in the name of protecting profits for Premarin, their prescription agent. It's bad enough to be selling this worthless drug. It's even worse--criminal, in my mind--to try to stamp out our right to have a physician write a prescription for a pharmacy to mix up hormones identical to that humans produce, individualized to our needs.

If you are as angry about this as I am, please go to the Life Extension online reprint that provides access to the International Academy of Compounding Pharmacists website to send the FDA an e-mail describing your opinion, or go to www.iacprx.org.
Loading
Large new clinical study launched to study. . .niacin

Large new clinical study launched to study. . .niacin


Oxford University has issued a press release announcing plans for a new clinical trial to raise HDL cholesterol and reduce heart attack risk. 20,000 participants will be enrolled in this substantial effort. The agent? Niacin.

How is that new? Well, this time niacin comes with a new spin.

Dr. Jane Armitage, formerly with the Heart Protection Study that showed that simvastatin (Zocor) reduced heart attack risk regardless of starting LDL, is lead investigator. She hopes to prove that niacin raises HDL cholesterol and thereby reduces heart attack risk. But, this time, niacin will be combined with an inhibitor of prostaglandins that blocks the notorious "flushing" effect of niacin.

The majority of Track Your Plaque participants hoping to control or reverse coronary plaque take niacin. Recall that niacin (vitamin B3)is an extremely effect agent that raises HDL, dramatically reduces small LDL, shifts HDL particles into the effective large fraction, reduces triglycerides and triglyceride-containing particles like IDL and VLDL. Several studies have shown that niacin dramatically reduces heart attack. The HATS Study showed that niacin combined with Zocor yielded an 85-90% reduction in heart attack risk and achieved regression of coronary plaque in many participants.

In our experience, approximately 1 in 20 people will really struggle using niacin. Flushes for these occasional people will be difficult or even intolerable. Should Dr. Armitage's study demonstrate that this new combination agent does provide advantages in minimizing the hot flush effect, that will be a boon for the occasional Track Your Plaque participant who finds conventional niacin intolerable.

But you already have access to niacin, an agent with an impressive track record even without this new study. And you have a reasonably effective prostaglandin inhibitor, as well: aspirin. Good old aspirin is very useful, particularly in the first few months of your niacin initiation to blunt the flush.

Although this study is likely to further popularize niacin and allow its broader use, it's also a method for the drug companies to profit from an agent they know works but is cheap and available.

You don't have to wait. You already have niacin and aspirin available to you.

Comments (3) -

  • Dick B

    6/14/2006 7:38:00 PM |

    Niacin flushing can be effectively controlled with milk thistle. This information has been available for a year or so on www.nialor.com. I tried aspirin. It didn't work for me. Nialor is a product that combines 700 mg niacin with 175 mg of milk thistle powder. In my opinion, and this process worked for me, starting niacin should be done with small doses, such as 25mg with a milk thistle tablet once a day, then the combo twice a day, then 50 mg of niacin with a milk thistle tablet, etc., to gradually allow your body to adjust before taking the full Nialor tablet. In about two weeks, you should be able to take a Nialor tablet with 700 mg of niacin with its milk thistle and not flush. I now take three Nialor tablets a day, morning, noon and evening. It has been extremely effective for me. I initally tried niacin with aspirin. The flush was hard to take. Then I tried flush-free niacin. That did not produce a flush, but it was ineffective.

  • Scorpion~

    8/13/2008 2:03:00 PM |

    Interesting ... did they lower their dose? Current informatiion shows only 500 mg crystalized niacin per tablet.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 9:37:42 PM |

    In our experience, approximately 1 in 20 people will really struggle using niacin. Flushes for these occasional people will be difficult or even intolerable. Should Dr. Armitage's study demonstrate that this new combination agent does provide advantages in minimizing the hot flush effect, that will be a boon for the occasional Track Your Plaque participant who finds conventional niacin intolerable.

Loading