Why Is There So Much Conflicting Information About Aspirin?

jzeno

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
543
One study says aspiring will kill you (I'm exaggerating) and another says it will cure almost everything (again, exaggeration). Why is this?

Is it simply a case of 'follow the money'? I understand there is a huge incentive for pharmaceutical companies to convince people not to use aspirin because it's either ineffective or even dangerous and alternatively convince them to use their proprietary drug which only their doctor can prescribe.

Or is it more complicated then that?

Please excuse my ignorance on this matter; I'm new to understanding the scientific details in invidivual studies and I don't understand the minute differences in the studies as well as Ray and others on this forum do--haidut, et al--which can have a huge impact on results and also conclusions.

For example, there are tons of examples on this forum detailing all the benefits of aspirin--Ray has written a few articles on aspirin, too.

Then why is that at the same time articles like these appear? With daily low-dose aspirin use, risks may outweigh benefits, new research says

They site 3 studies in this article:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1800722
"...randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial — considered the gold standard for clinical trials."
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1805819
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1803955

So, if I trust this news source it would lead me to believe that aspirin is in fact either not effective or possibly even dangerous. But, I don't think that's the whole story (from my intuition and also from the conflicting research currently available).

Why then do these studies come to these conclusions (aspirin is either ineffective or dangerous) while some research comes to conclusions which suggest the opposite?

@haidut, care to weigh in?

Please explain why we see such conflicting data in clinical studies.

Thank you all for taking the time to break this down for me and provide your opinion
 

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
One study says aspiring will kill you (I'm exaggerating) and another says it will cure almost everything (again, exaggeration). Why is this?

Is it simply a case of 'follow the money'? I understand there is a huge incentive for pharmaceutical companies to convince people not to use aspirin because it's either ineffective or even dangerous and alternatively convince them to use their proprietary drug which only their doctor can prescribe.

Or is it more complicated then that?

Please excuse my ignorance on this matter; I'm new to understanding the scientific details in invidivual studies and I don't understand the minute differences in the studies as well as Ray and others on this forum do--haidut, et al--which can have a huge impact on results and also conclusions.

For example, there are tons of examples on this forum detailing all the benefits of aspirin--Ray has written a few articles on aspirin, too.

Then why is that at the same time articles like these appear? With daily low-dose aspirin use, risks may outweigh benefits, new research says

They site 3 studies in this article:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1800722
"...randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial — considered the gold standard for clinical trials."
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1805819
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1803955

So, if I trust this news source it would lead me to believe that aspirin is in fact either not effective or possibly even dangerous. But, I don't think that's the whole story (from my intuition and also from the conflicting research currently available).

Why then do these studies come to these conclusions (aspirin is either ineffective or dangerous) while some research comes to conclusions which suggest the opposite?

@haidut, care to weigh in?

Please explain why we see such conflicting data in clinical studies.

Thank you all for taking the time to break this down for me and provide your opinion

Again, this has been discussed hundreds of times before and please do not tag only me when you ask such a generic question because it is akin to sending me a PM and nobody else will chime in as they assume your questions in only to me.
Instead of repeating the same arguments over and over again you can maybe do my experiment. I went to PubMed and did a search for "aspirin[title/abstract]" (without the quotes). Count how many results you get. I get over 46,000. I pulled their PubMed ID numbers and shuffled them until I got them more or less randomly distributed. I then generated 100 random numbers between 1 and 46000. I looked at the studies indexed with those numbers in the list and saw what their conclusions were in regards to aspirin - i.e beneficial or not, regardless of the condition. Of the 100 randomly selected ones I got, only two (2) reported null effect from aspirin. So, not even a negative, but rather just no benefit. That means, statistically, 98%+ of the studies with aspirin reported benefit. Repeat the same analysis for any other drug/chemical and see if anything else comes even close to aspirin.
At the end nothing will convince you about something except your own experience. But if you want statistical evidence reported by others, this quick and dirty analysis should give you a good hint of whether aspirin is worth bothering using. Ideally, you should also be learning of aspirin's biochemistry and how it affects various pathways in an organism and that should also give you pretty good idea of whether it is good or not.
 

schultz

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
2,653
I don't think you should be so hard on him Haidut, though I don't get dozens of PM's and people tagging me in posts all the time so maybe I'd think differently in that case.

I like your random pubmed sampling method. I'd like to try that, but 100 papers is a lot to read through!!!

In the study it says...

"In contrast to the ASPREE trial, meta-analyses of previous randomized prevention trials of aspirin have shown a protective effect of aspirin on cancer-related death, which became evident after 4 or 5 years of continuous therapy. Despite limited periods of intervention (typically ≤5 years), the preventive effect of aspirin was maintained for at least 15 years. There was also evidence of a lower risk of death from metastatic spread of cancer among participants who received aspirin than among those who received placebo."

The NEJM study was under 5 years. The study they are citing says this...

"The latent period before an effect on deaths was about 5 years for oesophageal, pancreatic, brain, and lung cancer, but was more delayed for stomach, colorectal, and prostate cancer."

A higher dose may yield a more positive outcome in the shorter time frame. I'm not sure why they chose to end the study before the 5 year period. It's possible if the study had been 10 years there would have been a better outcome for the aspirin group. Of course the media won't explain all of this, they will just say "Aspirin not effective" or "Aspirin causes cancer" ......... and this of course is the biggest issue of all, the media!!! lol
 
OP
jzeno

jzeno

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
543
Interesting. So it's just a media problem, then.

Thank you for breaking down those articles. I don't have an NEJM or Lancet account, so I wasn't able to access the full articles myself.

Really, I just wanted to find out: If we assume a great amount of trust in these media reports, then how can we be getting such conflicting information from reports like these when contrasted with other reports on aspirin? And I guess the answer is: You can't really trust these media reports, because the articles themselves reveal a much different picture and they are probably revealing a limited amount of information in order to generate interest.

Controversy generates clicks, which generates revenue. Business, I get it. Not a perfect world, but a pretty good one I would say. I'd rather have the media and researchers, then not. Just a small wrinkle in the system I suppose.

Would still like to hear what others think on the subject, too.

Thanks schultz.

Thanks haidut for sharing that research tip. That might come handy in the future.
 

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
I don't think you should be so hard on him Haidut, though I don't get dozens of PM's and people tagging me in posts all the time so maybe I'd think differently in that case.

I like your random pubmed sampling method. I'd like to try that, but 100 papers is a lot to read through!!!

In the study it says...

"In contrast to the ASPREE trial, meta-analyses of previous randomized prevention trials of aspirin have shown a protective effect of aspirin on cancer-related death, which became evident after 4 or 5 years of continuous therapy. Despite limited periods of intervention (typically ≤5 years), the preventive effect of aspirin was maintained for at least 15 years. There was also evidence of a lower risk of death from metastatic spread of cancer among participants who received aspirin than among those who received placebo."

The NEJM study was under 5 years. The study they are citing says this...

"The latent period before an effect on deaths was about 5 years for oesophageal, pancreatic, brain, and lung cancer, but was more delayed for stomach, colorectal, and prostate cancer."

A higher dose may yield a more positive outcome in the shorter time frame. I'm not sure why they chose to end the study before the 5 year period. It's possible if the study had been 10 years there would have been a better outcome for the aspirin group. Of course the media won't explain all of this, they will just say "Aspirin not effective" or "Aspirin causes cancer" ......... and this of course is the biggest issue of all, the media!!! lol

Was I being harsh?? I simply asked not to be tagged unless it is a question specific to me. I think he was asking the question to everybody.
Anyways, I think the randomization method prevents more recent studies from being given more weight and it seems like most of the studies with aspirin are quite positive. I am not saying it is a slam dunk, every chemical has its risks. But I know of no other chemical that has had so much positive results AND across so many different conditions/issues. The breadth of aspirin's reach I think is pretty telling. Nothing harmful is likely to cover so many bases at the same time.
 

schultz

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
2,653
I would also like to hear from more people. It's a good subject, and I don't necessarily mean "Is aspirin good or not" but more like "How come studies appear to contradict each other." I think it's a good exercise to try and delve into this stuff so that we can all understand the research better. I try to do this myself, but I am not that smart and have trouble with figuring out dose conversion (animal to human) and some of the more complex stuff. What I have going for me I suppose is that I am actually willing to read through papers, and most people don't care to (apparently I have nothing better to do... :( )

I don't think the media is completely to blame, but you're right that they need to generate clicks. People want a simple and concise message and usually the headline is that message, but buried deep in an article is usually a bit more truth.
Was I being harsh?? I simply asked not to be tagged unless it is a question specific to me. I think he was asking the question to everybody.
Anyways, I think the randomization method prevents more recent studies from being given more weight and it seems like most of the studies with aspirin are quite positive. I am not saying it is a slam dunk, every chemical has its risks. But I know of no other chemical that has had so much positive results AND across so many different conditions/issues. The breadth of aspirin's reach I think is pretty telling. Nothing harmful is likely to cover so many bases at the same time.

I suppose you were not really. It's sort of hard to judge a persons tone online, and I guess I just assumed.
 

Waynish

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
2,206
Again, this has been discussed hundreds of times before and please do not tag only me when you ask such a generic question because it is akin to sending me a PM and nobody else will chime in as they assume your questions in only to me.
Instead of repeating the same arguments over and over again you can maybe do my experiment. I went to PubMed and did a search for "aspirin[title/abstract]" (without the quotes). Count how many results you get. I get over 46,000. I pulled their PubMed ID numbers and shuffled them until I got them more or less randomly distributed. I then generated 100 random numbers between 1 and 46000. I looked at the studies indexed with those numbers in the list and saw what their conclusions were in regards to aspirin - i.e beneficial or not, regardless of the condition. Of the 100 randomly selected ones I got, only two (2) reported null effect from aspirin. So, not even a negative, but rather just no benefit. That means, statistically, 98%+ of the studies with aspirin reported benefit. Repeat the same analysis for any other drug/chemical and see if anything else comes even close to aspirin.
At the end nothing will convince you about something except your own experience. But if you want statistical evidence reported by others, this quick and dirty analysis should give you a good hint of whether aspirin is worth bothering using. Ideally, you should also be learning of aspirin's biochemistry and how it affects various pathways in an organism and that should also give you pretty good idea of whether it is good or not.

Science... Bro :cool::cool::cool:
 

Cameron

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2018
Messages
912
Location
Tennessee
Haidut have you ever used aspirin daily have you noticed mood or sleep benefits ? It's action on oxygen and co2 is clearly studied a lot and interesting for cell health but have you considered it a great tool for you still?
 

Mark2020

Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
35
I used to be MAJORLY against aspirin because it’s not “natural”, but after getting my hands on pure aspirin powder, I changed my tune. The benefits I’ve received from aspirin are probably 10x more powerful than anything else I’ve ever taken, even thyroid. Pure aspirin powder, even in a tiny 1/32 scoop dosage, makes me feel fantastic. I think less is more with it, from personal experience, just like cascara sagrada.

I feel supremely calm, oxygenated, warm, clear minded, and optimistic, within 5-10 mins of a single micro dose of pure aspirin. Like I said, nothing else has even come close.

And for what it’s worth, regular aspirin in tablet form caused me massive GI irritation. Even when dissolved in hot water, strained, and with baking soda. It never digested well. Pure aspirin powder tastes totally neutral, with little to no acid reaction in my body.
 

Waynish

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
2,206
I used to be MAJORLY against aspirin because it’s not “natural”, but after getting my hands on pure aspirin powder, I changed my tune. The benefits I’ve received from aspirin are probably 10x more powerful than anything else I’ve ever taken, even thyroid. Pure aspirin powder, even in a tiny 1/32 scoop dosage, makes me feel fantastic. I think less is more with it, from personal experience, just like cascara sagrada.

I feel supremely calm, oxygenated, warm, clear minded, and optimistic, within 5-10 mins of a single micro dose of pure aspirin. Like I said, nothing else has even come close.

And for what it’s worth, regular aspirin in tablet form caused me massive GI irritation. Even when dissolved in hot water, strained, and with baking soda. It never digested well. Pure aspirin powder tastes totally neutral, with little to no acid reaction in my body.
Which product do you consider pure? Perhaps they all don't fabricate it the same way... I was not impressed with the Geri-Care stuff that was widely recommended.
 

rainbowdrops

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
33
I used to be MAJORLY against aspirin because it’s not “natural”, but after getting my hands on pure aspirin powder, I changed my tune. The benefits I’ve received from aspirin are probably 10x more powerful than anything else I’ve ever taken, even thyroid. Pure aspirin powder, even in a tiny 1/32 scoop dosage, makes me feel fantastic. I think less is more with it, from personal experience, just like cascara sagrada.

I feel supremely calm, oxygenated, warm, clear minded, and optimistic, within 5-10 mins of a single micro dose of pure aspirin. Like I said, nothing else has even come close.

And for what it’s worth, regular aspirin in tablet form caused me massive GI irritation. Even when dissolved in hot water, strained, and with baking soda. It never digested well. Pure aspirin powder tastes totally neutral, with little to no acid reaction in my body.
I’m interested in trying aspirin but have an ileostomy after large bowel removal and lots of resections, possibly sibo but it’s all terribly convoluted, do you think it’s too much a risk for GI bleeding or would powder be a better shout?
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2021
Messages
38
I used to be MAJORLY against aspirin because it’s not “natural”, but after getting my hands on pure aspirin powder, I changed my tune. The benefits I’ve received from aspirin are probably 10x more powerful than anything else I’ve ever taken, even thyroid. Pure aspirin powder, even in a tiny 1/32 scoop dosage, makes me feel fantastic. I think less is more with it, from personal experience, just like cascara sagrada.

I feel supremely calm, oxygenated, warm, clear minded, and optimistic, within 5-10 mins of a single micro dose of pure aspirin. Like I said, nothing else has even come close.

And for what it’s worth, regular aspirin in tablet form caused me massive GI irritation. Even when dissolved in hot water, strained, and with baking soda. It never digested well. Pure aspirin powder tastes totally neutral, with little to no acid reaction in my body.
Does this count as pure aspirin. What will be the right dosage
 

L_C

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
554
One study says aspiring will kill you (I'm exaggerating) and another says it will cure almost everything (again, exaggeration). Why is this?

Is it simply a case of 'follow the money'? I understand there is a huge incentive for pharmaceutical companies to convince people not to use aspirin because it's either ineffective or even dangerous and alternatively convince them to use their proprietary drug which only their doctor can prescribe.

Or is it more complicated then that?

Please excuse my ignorance on this matter; I'm new to understanding the scientific details in invidivual studies and I don't understand the minute differences in the studies as well as Ray and others on this forum do--haidut, et al--which can have a huge impact on results and also conclusions.

For example, there are tons of examples on this forum detailing all the benefits of aspirin--Ray has written a few articles on aspirin, too.

Then why is that at the same time articles like these appear? With daily low-dose aspirin use, risks may outweigh benefits, new research says

They site 3 studies in this article:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1800722
"...randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial — considered the gold standard for clinical trials."
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1805819
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1803955

So, if I trust this news source it would lead me to believe that aspirin is in fact either not effective or possibly even dangerous. But, I don't think that's the whole story (from my intuition and also from the conflicting research currently available).

Why then do these studies come to these conclusions (aspirin is either ineffective or dangerous) while some research comes to conclusions which suggest the opposite?

@haidut, care to weigh in?

Please explain why we see such conflicting data in clinical studies.

Thank you all for taking the time to break this down for me and provide your opinion
I got my hands on the book about medicinal plants. One thing they said about aspirin is that it contains only the active ingredients and hence it can be harsh on stomach and cause stomach ulcers. They advised to collect white willow bark which contain both active and inactive ingredients that are meant to work together and minimize the risk of stomach problems.
 

EmperorOfMan

Member
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
37
I used to be MAJORLY against aspirin because it’s not “natural”, but after getting my hands on pure aspirin powder, I changed my tune. The benefits I’ve received from aspirin are probably 10x more powerful than anything else I’ve ever taken, even thyroid. Pure aspirin powder, even in a tiny 1/32 scoop dosage, makes me feel fantastic. I think less is more with it, from personal experience, just like cascara sagrada.

I feel supremely calm, oxygenated, warm, clear minded, and optimistic, within 5-10 mins of a single micro dose of pure aspirin. Like I said, nothing else has even come close.

And for what it’s worth, regular aspirin in tablet form caused me massive GI irritation. Even when dissolved in hot water, strained, and with baking soda. It never digested well. Pure aspirin powder tastes totally neutral, with little to no acid reaction in my body.
Hey if you don't mind would care to share where you acquired pure aspirin powder? This sounds like something i could really use! Thankyou
 

sunny

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
886
Ray Peat recommends aspirin with food. If using a tablet, crush it up, dissolve in water, drink with food- leave the parts that settle out in the bottom of glass.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom