Letter to the editor: Americans need polypills | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Americans need polypills

To lower costs, low-dose combo pills, or polypills, need to be available and then prescribed (“Cheap combo pill cuts heart, stroke risks, study finds,” Aug. 22, TribLIVE).

The five-year study of the combination of four low-dose drugs (two for blood pressure, one for cholesterol and aspirin) that lowered heart issues by one-third involved about 6,800 people in Iran, ages 50-75, some with previous heart problems. All participants received advice on healthy lifestyles, and half were given polypills. By the end of the study, 6% in the pill group had suffered a heart attack, stroke or heart failure, and 9% of the others had similar problems — showing a 34% lower risk with the polypill (22% lower risk after taking into account other heart drugs participants were taking).

A study of a three-dose polypill by the George Institute for Global Health in Australia showed quick and effective lowering of blood pressure. At the time the study results were presented (2018), such pills were not for sale in Australia, but the lead investigator noted that a low-dose combination pill was available in India.

It’s easier to take one pill a day. Assuming no concern for interactions, the only problem is that they are cheaper in the long run, so drug companies will resist. Note their recent resistance to low-dose aspirin (cheap since it’s a man-made version of a natural chemical).

Oh, if only a new safe generic start-up for polypills to compete with big Pharma could be started in the USA. Anybody out there?

Frank Kushner

Delmont


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.