This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David A. Blandino, MD
Shadyside Hospital Pittsburgh, Pa

JAMA. 1996;275(7):516.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—I was disturbed by the obfuscation of the editorial comments of Dr Buring and colleagues.¹ To just present a discussion of the degree of clinical certainty to be derived from scientific studies and then to simply conclude that the findings of Dr Psaty and colleagues² offer no clear and important message squander an opportunity to teach a vital lesson and neglect the importance of this ironic twist in the history of hypertension management.

It was exactly the same kind of "miscommunication" of nondefinitive data that disparaged the use of diuretics initially.³ In addition, such noncompelling data, aggressively marketed by the pharmaceutical industry, stimulated the substitution of CCBs and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for both diuretics and β-blockers, despite the latter two's definite clinical benefits.^3,4 If the pen is mightier than the sword, then those who live by its exploitation risk dying by its proper . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?