Disease Prevention From a Doctors' Perspective
Medical Author: Dennis Lee, MD
Medical Editor: Melissa Conrad Stoppler, MD
Introduction - A Doctor's philosophy concerning disease prevention
Preventing disease is different from treating diseases.
In treating diseases, doctors and patients are often willing to accept a finite
degree of risk of side effects in order to achieve a cure or reduction of
uncomfortable symptoms. In preventing diseases, doctors are extremely risk
adverse. Remember, the first priority in doctoring is to "do no harm". Thus,
when prescribing an agent for prolonged periods of time to prevent a disease
that may or may not occur, the doctor would not want that agent to cause adverse side effects in a
healthy
person.
Sometimes doctors are willing to recommend a long-term prevention treatment
in the absence of any conclusive proof of benefit provided the treatment is
safe. This is especially true if the rationale for the treatment also has a
sound scientific basis and the treatment has been found to be beneficial in
observational studies.
- For example: observational studies have shown that people who
take folic acid
supplements have lower blood levels of homocysteine. Observational studies
have also shown that higher blood levels of homocysteine increase the risk of
coronary arterioscleroses and heart
attacks. Scientific studies have also shown that homocysteine can cause
injury to the inner lining of arteries, thus promoting atherosclerosis. Even
though there is not yet conclusive proof from prospective placebo-controlled
trials that taking folic acid actually prevents heart attacks, doctors are
recommending that all adults take a daily multivitamin that contains folic
acid because it is known to be safe when taken over a long term.
In this situation, doctors do not want to miss an opportunity to recommend
something safe to possibly prevent heart attacks while waiting for absolute
proof of its effectiveness, which can be many years away.
- Another example: Blood
cholesterol. Thirty years ago,
observational studies suggested that high blood cholesterol (like
homocysteine) could cause coronary artery disease and heart attacks. Even
though there were no double-blind placebo-controlled trials available,
doctors in those days suspected (correctly) that lowering blood cholesterol
could reduce heart attacks. They were recommending low fat diets and
exercise to lower blood cholesterol, and medications such as statins only
when diet and exercise failed. They also did one very important thing-they
started numerous, large-scale, randomized, placebo-controlled trials to
determine if lowering cholesterol actually prevents heart attacks.
Today the prospective trials they started have been
completed. These trials have conclusively shown that lowering cholesterol
(especially the "bad" LDL cholesterol) reduces heart attack risks and prolongs
life. These trials further showed that the benefits of lowering cholesterol
outweigh the risks of side effects of the statin medications. Therefore doctors
today are much more aggressive than doctors of yester-years when prescribing measures to lower LDL
cholesterol. Doctors are much more willing to use medications such as statins to
lower cholesterol, and the "normal cholesterol level" has been rapidly reduced.