Vatican pushing Mexico in abortion fight
Sat, 24 Mar 2007 05:22:45 GMT
By JULIE WATSON, Associated Press Writer
MEXICO CITY - The
Vatican's top anti-abortion campaigner kicked off the Roman Catholic Church's aggressive campaign against plans to legalize abortion in Mexico Friday.
Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo inaugurated an international anti-abortion conference by giving a Mass at the Basilica of the Virgin of Guadalupe, the most important Catholic shrine in the Americas.
In a prayer to the Virgin of Guadalupe before about 300 people, many carrying flags from other Latin American countries, Lopez Trujillo asked for the strengthening of women "so they can teach their children moral values" but didn't speak directly against abortion.
The campaign pushes the limit of Mexico's constitutional ban on political activity by religious groups. It is also drawing President Felipe Calderon, a conservative who opposes abortion, into a showdown with leftists spearheading the bills to legalize abortion.
While the church has always been against abortion, the Vatican especially does not want to lose its anti-abortion fight in Mexico, which has the second-largest Catholic population in Latin America.
"In the name of Jesus Christ and his Gospel, we ask, we implore they do not approve an unjust and bloody law that kills the innocent," said the Rev. Hugo Valdemar, spokesman for the Catholic Archdiocese of Mexico City.
At a press conference after Mass, Lopez Trujillo, who made headlines in 2003 for saying condoms do not prevent
AIDS, said he was in Mexico to present a book about the Catholic Church's philosophy and not to intervene in the capital's abortion debate.
However, he said there already are too many abortions in the world and that "we don't have a reason to shred a human being who is a creation of God and who carries the world's hope."
The conference in Mexico City, sponsored by Mexico's leading anti-abortion group, Pro-Vida, will feature talks by anti-abortion activists, including Dr. John Wilkie, an early leader of the U.S.
National Right to Life Committee.
Mexico's Roman Catholic Church is calling on its followers to participate in a massive march Sunday led by Mexico City's own Cardinal Norberto Rivera.
Lawmakers from the main opposition Democratic Revolution Party, who proposed the bills to legalize abortion in the first three months of pregnancy, have asked the church to stay out of the matter.
The debate has drawn international interest, which also could test a Mexican law that bars foreigners from political activism.
In 2000, authorities barred U.S. and Canadian anti-abortion activists from returning to Mexico for five years after the group joined protests in Mexico City's main square.
The bill to legalize abortion is expected to easily pass in Mexico City, a leftist bastion where Democratic Revolution holds the mayorship and the majority of seats in the city legislature. Democratic Revolution lawmakers have filed a similar bill in the national Senate, but it is expected to face a tough battle there.
Most Latin American countries, including Mexico, allow abortion if the woman's life is in danger or in cases of rape or incest. In November, Nicaragua passed a law banning abortion in all cases. Cuba permits abortions within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, as does the United States.
Wealthier Mexican women often travel to the United States for abortions, while thousands of poor women risk drinking potent herbal teas, taking pills or using other risky measures to abort illegally.
"It's very easy to get an illegal abortion," said Cecilia Garcia, a street seller who hawks cosmetics in the poor city of Ecatepec on the capital's outskirts. "You can go to the Sonora market , look on the Internet for ways, or go to certain doctors who will do it."
___
Associated Press Writer Istra Pacheco contributed to this report.
MDs urge publisher to sever weapons ties
Fri, 23 Mar 2007 23:21:47 GMT
By MARIA CHENG, AP Medical Writer
LONDON - Physicians from around the world urged the publisher of The Lancet medical journal to cut its links to weapons sales, calling on the editors to find another publisher if Reed Elsevier refused to stop hosting arms fairs. The doctors made their appeal in the latest edition of The Lancet, released Friday.
Editors at The Lancet responded by backing the doctors, calling the situation "bizarre and untenable." They wrote in Friday's edition that — in the interest of health — they may have to consider an "organized campaign" against their own publisher.
"The Lancet is one of the most respected international medical journals and should not be linked to an industry involved in weapons designed to cause physical harm and death," wrote Dr. Ian Gilmore, president of the Royal College of Physicians, and Dr. Michael Pelly, the association's international adviser.
Some scientists have called for a boycott of journals published by Reed Elsevier Group PLC. Editors at the British Medical Journal have appealed to researchers to stop sending certain studies to The Lancet and other Reed Elsevier titles.
On Friday, The Lancet published three pages of protest letters from leading doctors and organizations, including the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Doctors for
http://www.thelancet.com
Edwards saga shows new face of cancer
Fri, 23 Mar 2007 23:39:50 GMT
By JOCELYN NOVECK, AP National Writer
NEW YORK - Just two decades ago, a breast cancer diagnosis was something a patient likely wouldn't share beyond close family and friends. Even the word "cancer" was barely spoken out loud. And no wonder: It raised immediate thoughts of a death sentence.
So when Elizabeth Edwards greeted the waiting media with a smile, a frank account of her worsening illness and a declaration that her life would go on exactly as before, it was an important reminder to many in the cancer community of how far things had come — and how people like Edwards are representing a new face of the disease.
It wasn't just the striking openness displayed by Edwards and her husband, former Sen.
John Edwards. It was the message that a patient can approach cancer, even the serious metastatic disease that Edwards now has, as a manageable condition similar to diabetes. As something that, while grave, can be lived with — even in the grueling contest for the White House, and perhaps even as first lady.
"I expect to do next week all the things I did last week," Elizabeth Edwards said, "and the week after that and next year at the same time, all the same things I did last week ... I don't expect my life to be significantly different."
And her husband, acknowledging the cancer would never be cured, ed their doctor as using the analogy of diabetes: "The disease never goes away. But you treat it ... you take your medicine. And that's exactly what we intend to do."
To Dr. Richard Wender, president of the
American Cancer Society, looking at advanced cancer this way is relatively new.
"The comparison to something like diabetes — that's a whole new concept," says Wender. In large part, he says, it's a function of new treatments and better drugs that can preserve quality of life, for months or years. People like Edwards can show that "cancer has been converted from a short battle that you either win or lose, to a chronic siege," he says. A chronic siege, he adds, that you can fight while still enjoying life and pursuing your goals.
Edwards "will have a very important impact for many individuals," Wender says. "She can offer hope and courage to others facing more advanced disease."
When Dana Kaplan watched replays of the Edwards' news conference, she says she immediately felt as if it were she and her own husband talking. "That's exactly how we felt when I was diagnosed a second time," says the two-time breast cancer survivor from Westfield, N.J.
Kaplan and her husband had just returned from their honeymoon when the second round of cancer was discovered, five years after the first. She elected to have a double mastectomy.
"We said, 'You know what, let's get through this and move on and keep as normal a life as possible,'" Kaplan says. "And I think it was John Edwards who said, 'You can cower in the corner and hide or you can be tough.' It's true — you can't just stop life when something like this happens."
"It's wonderful that they've decided that it will be empowering for them, to fight back and pursue their goals," said Kaplan, now 41, a partner in her law firm and a mother of two young sons.
Dr. Linda Vahdat, an oncologist, remembers how not long ago — perhaps 15 years — people wouldn't talk about cancer. "They spoke about it in hushed tones," says Vahdat, director of the Breast Cancer Research Program at New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. "People wouldn't even say the word."
But now all that has changed, with huge marches for breast cancer research and people wearing pink ribbons, Vahdat says. And patients like Edwards.
"She can send a message of hope — absolutely," Vahdat says. "She's not letting breast cancer run her life, and I think that's great." Of patients who have stage 4 cancer like Edwards — meaning it has spread beyond the breast and lymph nodes, in her case to a rib and possibly elsewhere — Vahdat says "the majority are living normal lives — taking care of their families, going to work, and living their lives."
That wasn't always the case. "Decades ago, a diagnosis of Stage 4 breast cancer meant not a very favorable prognosis at all," says Margaret C. Kirk, CEO of the Y-ME National Breast Cancer Organization, a Chicago-based support group. "But we see people living for a long time with cancer now, realizing there IS life after a diagnosis."
Of the Edwards' decision to continue the presidential campaign, "I applaud them for it," says Kirk, whose organization runs a 24/7 hotline staffed by breast cancer survivors. "They obviously sat down together, discussed what was important to them and decided to go forward," she said. "It's their decision, and no one else can second-guess them."
Of course, the course of the campaign depends on how Elizabeth Edwards fares with treatment. And no amount of positive thinking can erase the fact that with breast cancer at any stage, you can never be sure you're home free. Edwards spoke of the constant fear of recurrence that survivors feel. And the singer Sheryl Crow, interviewed on CNN Thursday night, said that like many others she couldn't help but feel a tinge of fear when she heard Edwards' story — even though her own cancer was caught early and she believes she has been cured.
One grandmother of seven who's survived both breast and ovarian cancer says she still has fears, even at 73. Mickey Scherl was diagnosed at age 57 — the same age Edwards is now.
"I've never stopped worrying about recurrence," says Scherl, "but that's the reality. I can't live my life thinking about it. I have things to do, and people depend on me."
Scherl watched the Edwards' joint appearance, and was struck by John Edwards' words of support.
"He's obviously totally devoted to her, and to the country," Scherl said. "He said he'd be there for her, and I believe that. As long as she's feeling well, they should go for it."
And, says Scherl, she and countless others are rooting for them — politics aside.
"If I have anything to do with it," Scherl says, "she's going to make it."
Stent makers brace for new heart study
Sat, 24 Mar 2007 01:52:25 GMT
By MARK JEWELL, AP Business Writer
BOSTON - Wall Street analysts and many doctors anticipate a setback for stent makers Tuesday when a blockbuster study answers whether an artery-opening procedure plus drugs is better than medication alone for some patients. It's the first big study to directly compare angioplasty procedures with drug therapy alone as a way to prevent heart attacks and deaths in non-emergency cases.
If the research reaches the conclusion many analysts and doctors expect — that angioplasty offers little or no lifesaving benefit over drugs for these patients — the finding would be the latest dose of bad news for makers of stents. The tiny mesh scaffolds are used in most angioplasties to keep vessels open after blockages have been cleared.
After new-model drug-coated stents reached the market in 2003, the global stent market including older bare-metal stents grew from about $2 billion a year to about $6 billion in 2005.
Drug-coated stents have been implanted in more than 6 million people worldwide — a modern record for fastest use of a new medical device.
But use has fallen since new evidence emerged that drug-coated stents carry a slightly higher risk of triggering blood clots months or years later. Many doctors have returned to using the older bare-metal stents or doing bypass surgery instead of angioplasty until more is known.
The drug-coated stent market shrank last year and is expected to erode at a faster rate this year, due in part to anticipation of the newest heart study.
"This market went from zero to 100 mph, and now it's braking," said Citigroup analyst Matthew Dodds, who forecasts an 8 percent decline in overall stent sales this year, and slower market erosion through 2011.
For drug-coated stent makers such as Natick, Mass.-based Boston Scientific Corp. and New Brunswick, N.J.-based Johnson & Johnson, the shift has been costly, since drug-coated models cost around $2,100 apiece compared with $850 for bare-metal versions introduced more than a decade ago.
A stent is typically inserted into a heart artery during angioplasty, a procedure in which a miniature balloon is guided through a vessel in the groin and then inflated to flatten a clog and restore blood flow to the heart.
The stent keeps the artery open, and drug-coated ones ooze medication to keep scar tissue from forming and the vessel from squeezing shut again.
Angioplasty, with a cost ranging from about $10,000 to $38,000, is the top treatment for people suffering heart attacks. But as many as 85 percent of angioplasties are non-emergency and done for people with less severe blockages that cause recurrent chest pain.
The big study to be reported on Tuesday compared angioplasty plus optimal heart medications — aspirin, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors and statins to lower cholesterol — to medications alone. Results are to be presented Tuesday at the American College of Cardiology's annual meeting in New Orleans.
Pointing to earlier smaller studies, industry analysts and doctors believe angioplasties will be on the losing end.
"There's absolutely no indication" the study will show angioplasty is superior, said Thom Gunderson, an industry analyst with Piper Jaffray.
Dr. John Lopez, a cardiologist at the University of Chicago Hospitals, noted that the new study followed only patients whose heart conditions were stable, rather than those facing imminent risks. He believes that it's primarily higher-risk patients who benefit more from the artery-opening procedure.
"I'd be very surprised if there was a reduction in mortality," said Dr. William Maisel, a cardiologist at Beth
Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. "I suspect the bottom line we will be left with is that both options are reasonable."
That result would mirror findings in recent studies — including two within the past month — that examined smaller groups.
If patients can't expect a better chance of long-term survival, angioplasty's cost may loom larger when it's elective, said Dr. David Cohen of St. Luke's Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, Mo.
Cohen said patients with stable heart problems, like the ones in the latest study, "probably should not be receiving this therapy on a first-line basis."
Dr. Donald Baim, Boston Scientific's chief medical officer, said doctors should look beyond survival rates and consider whether angioplasty with stents relieves chest pain.
"The decision should be driven by the desire to limit chest pain with the least invasive alternative that's practical," Baim said.
Drug-coated stents accounted for about 89 percent of all stents implanted early last year, according to a study by Millennium Research Group, a Toronto-based firm that surveys doctors.
But that proportion fell to just 70 percent in February after more doctors opted for bare-metal versions because of the blood-clot fears from the drug-coated models.
Boston Scientific's drug-coated Taxus stent accounted for about 25 percent of the company's $2.1 billion in fourth-quarter sales — down from 40 percent before the company bought Guidant Corp. for $27 billion last spring to diversify a medical devices portfolio overly dependent on Taxus.
In comparison, J&J is a far bigger company — with revenue of $13.7 billion last quarter — and far less dependent on its drug-coated Cypher stent, which nevertheless has been a key driver of J&J's profits in recent years.
In addition to hurting Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson, the shift away from drug-coated stents could also hit companies with next-generation drug-coated models that are just hitting European markets and are soon expected to arrive in the U.S. Such companies include North Chicago, Ill.-based Abbott Laboratories Inc., and Minnesota-based Medtronic Inc. and St. Jude Medical Inc.
Piper Jaffray's Gunderson foresees further damage if Tuesday's research results are as expected.
"No matter how well anticipated these results are, and no matter how the stock prices have adjusted to factor in the results we're all anticipating, there is still that impact from the headlines in the morning," he said.
Lowcarb diet speeds initial weight loss study
Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:04:12 GMT
NEW YORK - In a study of overweight and
obese people, those who went on a low carbohydrate diet lost
more weight -- and more fat -- than their peers who went on a
low-fat, portion-controlled diet.
After 12 weeks on the low-carb plan, study participants had
lost an average of 4.9 kilograms , compared to 2.5
kg for their peers on the low-fat diet.
However, after the weight-maintenance phase of the study,
which lasted another 24 weeks, differences between the two
groups in weight loss and fat mass remained, but were no longer
statistically significant.
The findings confirm that the low-carb diet tested in the
study is a &;reasonable alternative&; to cutting fat and
controlling portions in order to maintain a healthy weight, Dr.
Kevin C. Maki of Radiant Research in Chicago and colleagues
conclude.
The approach Maki's team tested -- a reduced-glycemic-load
diet -- required people to restrict their carbohydrate
intake and eat more low glycemic index foods, meaning
foods that produce a relatively small, gradual increase in
blood sugar levels. Low GI foods generally are rich in fiber,
consist of more complex carbohydrates, and include vegetables,
beans and whole grains.
Study participants on the RGL diet did not eat certain
high-carb foods, such as fruits and starches, for the first two
weeks, and also abstained from alcohol, after which they
introduced low-GI foods and were allowed to drink moderate
amounts of alcohol. But they were allowed to eat as much of the
permitted foods as they wanted. Those on the low-fat diet were
instructed to reduce their energy intake 500 to 800 calories
per day by eliminating high-fat foods and controlling portion
sizes.
After 12 weeks, study participants in either group could
continue on the weight loss diet or switch to a weight
maintenance plan.
At 12 weeks, the low-carb group had lost significantly more
weight, and also more fat -- 1.9 kg of fat vs. 0.9
kg for the low-fat diet group.
By 36 weeks, the low-carb group had kept off 4.5 kg (10
pounds), compared to 2.6 kg for the low-fat group,
not a huge difference.
Low-carb diet participants had maintained a 2 kg (4.4
pounds) loss of fat weight, compared to 1.3 kg for
the low fat group, which again was not a significant
difference.
The researchers say more research is needed to clarify the
mechanisms responsible for the greater initial losses of body
weight and fat associated with the RGL diet, to evaluate the
persistence of these losses over longer treatment periods, and
to obtain greater insight into strategies that would improve
long-term weight-loss maintenance.&;
SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, March 2007.