A pill a day isn't good for you after all

A study recently published in the Lancet suggests that it is not advisable for people to take a daily dose of Aspirin as a preventative measure against heart disease, casting doubt on the widespread guidance to that effect from doctors in the United States and Europe.

This painfully common-sense finding raises a lot of fundamental questions:

• What is the basis for ever prescribing pharmocologically active compounds as part of a daily diet? By their very nature these substances interfere with the functioning of the body: what justifies doing this on a permanent basis unless absolutely necessary (this applies also to the widespread use of multi-vitamins)? That too when a drug has documented risks and adverse effects.
• The principle of taking a drug to prevent an illness is itself flawed. Why would you prefer to mitigate the risks of heart disease (while adding other risks) rather than eliminate or avoid the root cause? Why would you not instead promote control of diet and lifestyle?
• Aspirin is well established as an aid in the treatment of heart disease, but not in its prevention. By what logic can one say that the method for prevention is the same as the method for cure? Would you "prevent" diabetes by taking insulin daily?

The medical community (no doubt cajoled by the pharmaceutical lobby) is responsible for a lot of misinformation thrown at the general public. Unfortunately it is highly respected by many people, who consider medical advice to be sacrosanct. Until we start to question more critically the "wisdom" of the doctors, we will remain prey to the far-from-Hippocratic intentions of the pharmaceutical industry.