21 replies to this topic

[prunk]

How many of you take aspirin on a daily basis and why?

 

I've been taking 50mg enteric coated for over a year because of a high number of platelets (almost 600). I'm close to 40y, physically pretty fit and never had a cardiocascular event, at least not yet. Strokes and heart attacks do run in my family. My doc thinks the risks are not very high, but wants me to keep taking it just in case. We still do not know the reason why my platelet count is elevated.

Edited by prunk, 09 February 2017 - 09:28 AM.

[VP.]

81 mg a day for years and all my blood tests are fine and my blood pressure is 105/80. 

[mikeinnaples]

81mg daily for over 10 years. The risk/reward from the multitude of information out there seems heavily tilted in favor of it. Great blood work here as well

 

 

[mrkosh1]

If aspirin is really such a potent anti-aging compound -- not sure if it is or isn't -- I'd like to take a small dose daily. However, I bleed easily (during a procedure at the clinic the doctor cutting into my neck to remove a nodule told me I'd never need to take aspirin because it could make me bleed out if I were in an accident) and the one time I donated blood I filled the bag up so quickly I surprised the nurse.

[joelcairo]

Everybody is different. The research is starting to show that the blood thinning and anticancer benefits outweigh the risks of inappropriate bleeding, on balance in a large population. However it could be very much contraindicated for certain individuals in the population.

[pamojja]

Was prescribed aspirin. However, even a Baby aspirin gave me immediate bloody stools. Even without such bleedings - I consider aspirin's risk/benefits ratio something for people who believe in playing lottery.

 

http://www.thennt.com/?s=Aspirin

 

 

Aspirin to Prevent a First Heart Attack or Stroke:

• None were helped (prevented death)
• 1 in 3333 were harmed (major bleeding event, Required hospital admission and transfusion)

Aspirin to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Known Heart Disease or Strokes:

• 1 in 333 were helped (prevented death)
• 1 in 400 were harmed (major bleeding event, Required hospital admission and transfusion)

 

 

 

[prunk]

"Aspirin to Prevent a First Heart Attack or Stroke:
None were helped (prevented death)
1 in 3333 were harmed (major bleeding event, Required hospital admission and transfusion)
Aspirin to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Known Heart Disease or Strokes:
1 in 333 were helped (prevented death)
1 in 400 were harmed (major bleeding event, Required hospital admission and transfusion)"

How do they know, in a case of preventing a first heart attack or stroke, that no one were helped?

[maxwatt]

If bleeding excessively, one may be deficient in vitamin K

[Dolph]

Highly unlikely, if no Vitamin K antagonist is used.

[Dann Blenkinstoff]

Aspirin has anti-aging capabilities  ? I need to go google this!

[TheFountain]

"Aspirin to Prevent a First Heart Attack or Stroke:
None were helped (prevented death)
1 in 3333 were harmed (major bleeding event, Required hospital admission and transfusion)
Aspirin to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Known Heart Disease or Strokes:
1 in 333 were helped (prevented death)
1 in 400 were harmed (major bleeding event, Required hospital admission and transfusion)"

How do they know, in a case of preventing a first heart attack or stroke, that no one were helped?

Where was this information derived from?

[pamojja]

Where was this information derived from?

 

From the link posted in the post just above that quote.

 

Quick summaries of evidence-based medicine.

 

We are a group of physicians that have developed a framework and rating system to evaluate therapies based on their patient-important benefits and harms as well as a system to evaluate diagnostics by patient sign, symptom, lab test or study.

 

We only use the highest quality, evidence-based studies (frequently, but not always Cochrane Reviews), and we accept no outside funding or advertisements.

 

How do they know, in a case of preventing a first heart attack or stroke, that no one were helped?

 

Source: Antithrombotic Trialists Collaboration. Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials. Lancet. 2009; 373(9678); 1849-60

Edited by pamojja, 16 October 2019 - 07:29 AM.

[pamojja]

If bleeding excessively, one may be deficient in vitamin K

Highly unlikely, if no Vitamin K antagonist is used.

 

In my own case whenever trialed a baby-aspiring (actually prescribed for my past PAD), blood becomes very liquid as observed with blood-glucose meassurements, and I get nose-bleeds and immetiate bloody bowel-movements. Even despite using high-dose K-vitamins. And my vitamin K1 serum level showing 9.94 µg/l (0.22-2.28 normal range).

 

Only thing which would prevent bleeds in my case is phosphatidyl-choline or lecithin.

Edited by pamojja, 16 October 2019 - 07:39 AM.

[TheFountain]

From the link posted in the post just above that quote.

 

 

 

Source: Antithrombotic Trialists Collaboration. Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials. Lancet. 2009; 373(9678); 1849-60

 

Ah yes, I saw all that after making my comment. 

 

But, what is that? Meta-analyses? Epidemiology? What is it?

 

And from whom? The English seems a bit broken. 

 

And whom were the people used for the trials? Did they have a history of CAD, did it run strongly in their families? What was their overall lifestyle like? 

 

These are pertinent questions. Ya can't just throw a bunch of McDonalds eating over weight people at a trial and expect something to help them the same way it might help someone who cares about their own bodies. 

 

There's a lot of outliers. 

Edited by TheFountain, 17 October 2019 - 08:52 PM.

[TheFountain]

Also, this

 

"In the secondary prevention trials, aspirin allocation yielded a greater absolute reduction in serious vascular events (6.7%vs 8.2% per year, p<0.0001),with a non-significant increase in haemorrhagic stroke but reductions of about a fifth in total stroke (2.08%vs 2.54% per year, p=0.002) and in coronary events (4.3%vs 5.3% per year, p<0.0001)." 

Edited by TheFountain, 17 October 2019 - 08:54 PM.

[pamojja]

But, what is that? Meta-analyses? Epidemiology? What is it?

 

And from whom? The English seems a bit broken. 

 

And whom were the people used for the trials? Did they have a history of CAD, did it run strongly in their families? What was their overall lifestyle like? 

 

These are pertinent questions.

 

Your are funny. I'm not a native english speaker and the abstract is very clear on all your questions

 

What is it? - A meta analysis of primary prevention and secondary prevention randomized controled trials, as outlined below:

 

 

METHODS:

We undertook meta-analyses of serious vascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, or vascular death) and major bleeds in six primary prevention trials (95,000 individuals at low average risk, 660,000 person-years, 3554 serious vascular events) and 16 secondary prevention trials (17,000 individuals at high average risk, 43,000 person-years, 3306 serious vascular events) that compared long-term aspirin versus control. We report intention-to-treat analyses of first events during the scheduled treatment period.

By whom? - they even mention a email address:

 

 

Antithrombotic Trialists' (ATT) Collaboration¹, Baigent C, Blackwell L, Collins R, Emberson J, Godwin J, Peto R, Buring J, Hennekens C, Kearney P, Meade T, Patrono C, Roncaglioni MC, Zanchetti A.

Collaborators (39)

Collins R, Peto R, Hennekens C, Doll R, Bubes V, Buring J, Dushkesas R, Gaziano M, Hennekens C, Brennan P, Meade T, Rudnicka A, Hansson L, Warnold I, Zanchetti A, Avanzini F, Roncaglioni MC, Tognoni G, Buring J, Chown M, Gaziano M, Hennekens C, Baigent C, Barton I, Baxter A, Bhala N, Blackwell L, Boreham J, Bowman L, Buck G, Collins R, Emberson J, Godwin J, Halls H, Holland L, Kearney P, Peto R, Reith C, Wilson K.

Author information

1 CTSU, Oxford University, Oxford, UK. colin.baigent@ctsu.ox.ac.uk

 

And whom were the people used for the trials? - also already found in Methods part of the abstract quoted above

 

(95,000 individuals at low average risk, 660,000 person-years, 3554 serious vascular events)

(17,000 individuals at high average risk, 43,000 person-years, 3306 serious vascular events)

 

With more than 112,000 in total studied individuals, probably representative of the general population.

 

 

Its scary, if one isn't able to read such a simple abstract.

[pamojja]

Also, this

 

"In the secondary prevention trials, aspirin allocation yielded a greater absolute reduction in serious vascular events (6.7%vs 8.2% per year, p<0.0001),with a non-significant increase in haemorrhagic stroke but reductions of about a fifth in total stroke (2.08%vs 2.54% per year, p=0.002) and in coronary events (4.3%vs 5.3% per year, p<0.0001)." 

 

Secondary prevention means prevention with aspirin after an CVD adverse event, ie. stroke or heart attack. First, this isn't telling anything about mortality. And secondly, it is not about you, who didn't already had an attack or stroke.

[TheFountain]

Your are funny. I'm not a native english speaker and the abstract is very clear on all your questions

 

What is it? - A meta analysis of primary prevention and secondary prevention randomized controled trials, as outlined below:

 

By whom? - they even mention a email address:

 

 

And whom were the people used for the trials? - also already found in Methods part of the abstract quoted above

 

(95,000 individuals at low average risk, 660,000 person-years, 3554 serious vascular events)

(17,000 individuals at high average risk, 43,000 person-years, 3306 serious vascular events)

 

With more than 112,000 in total studied individuals, probably representative of the general population.

 

 

Its scary, if one isn't able to read such a simple abstract.

It's scary when they don't account for lifestyle nor for correlating the results of "low risk" participants in comparison to "high risk" participants. And what of the abstract I pasted in my previous reply? It's scary how selective your reading is. 

Secondary prevention means prevention with aspirin after an CVD adverse event, ie. stroke or heart attack. First, this isn't telling anything about mortality. And secondly, it is not about you, who didn't already had an attack or stroke.

 So basically it helps, some percentage, of individuals who have had prior incidents, to prevent repeats of such incidents? 

 

What I want to know is, with regard to those at "low risk". How can they prove a negative?

[pamojja]

It's scary when they don't account for lifestyle nor for correlating the results of "low risk" participants in comparison to "high risk" participants.

 

That's what randomized controled trials are for. They randomly place one part of study participants (in this case half of the combined 112.000 study pariticipants of many RCTs) to get the agent, in this case aspirin - and the second part to get a placebo.

 

And what of the abstract I pasted in my previous reply? It's scary how selective your reading is.

 

Inasfar? - I only summarized the answers to your questions from exactly that abstract. You could have read it yourself. Where you think I distorted?

 

What I want to know is, with regard to those at "low risk". How can they prove a negative?

 

By counting incidences and death bodies. And compared to the placebo group.
 

 

 

Aspirin to Prevent a First Heart Attack or Stroke:

• None were helped (prevented death)
• 1 in 1667 were helped (cardiovascular problem prevented)
• 1 in 2000 were helped (prevented non-fatal heart attack)
• 1 in 3000 were helped (prevented non-fatal stroke)
• 1 in 3333 were harmed (major bleeding event, Required hospital admission and transfusion)

 

Edited by pamojja, 18 October 2019 - 04:57 AM.

[TheFountain]

That's what randomized controled trials are for. They randomly place one part of study participants (in this case half of the combined 112.000 study pariticipants of many RCTs) to get the agent, in this case aspirin - and the second part to get a placebo.

Yea but my point is there could be all kinds of shit going on and all kinds of shitty diets these participants are on and maybe they would've had the incidents regardless of supplementation. Nobody's saying supplementation is the be all without other healthy lifestyle co-factors. Such as Diet!

 

Another thing is, how healthy, or unhealthy were the participants already when beginning the randomized control study?? How far gone might they already have been???

Edited by TheFountain, 31 October 2019 - 05:15 AM.

[pamojja]

Yea but my point is there could be all kinds of shit going on and all kinds of shitty diets these participants are on and maybe they would've had the incidents regardless of supplementation. Nobody's saying supplementation is the be all without other healthy lifestyle co-factors. Such as Diet!

 

Another thing is, how healthy, or unhealthy were the participants already when beginning the randomized control study?? How far gone might they already have been???

 

Well, if you really don't believe the gold-standard of blinded randomized trials could accout for all those confounders to a certain extent, than you really would have to have billions in cash to design even better trials (..what ever that might be).

 

Or you just shut up, take the aspirin you seem convinced would prevent earlier mortality even without any health condition (while RCT contrarily clearly showed, with prior CVD event aspirin being indeed slightly more effective). But without any science behind that decision at all.

 

Otherwise you will just'll continue to question the results of the best we have in science, to confirm your own bias based on no science at all. You asked for the science behind aspirin, I gave the best we have as RCTs. If you're still not satisfied with its results, you're back to your speculations, and no science at all could convince you otherwise. Therefore I'm bowing out of such useless speculations.
 

[TheFountain]

Anybody ever taken Asprin with CoQ10?