Dr. Neal Rouzier Reacts To “Testosterone And Cardiovascular Risk”
Media Pushes Lawsuits
Recently there has been a flood of television advertisements for legal firms encouraging testosterone patients to pursue legal action. The primary focus targets testosterone therapy patients who claim cardiovascular complications, particularly myocardial infarction, which is more commonly known as a heart attack.
Targeting Pharmaceutical Companies
Law firms are encouraging patients to sue pharmaceutical companies and receive the compensation they deserve. This is based on a recent single study, known as the PLOS study, which has associated testosterone replacement therapy with increased risk of myocardial infarction.
Leading Doctor Differentiates Synthetic vs. Bio-Identical Hormones
Dr. Neal Rouzier, a leading expert in hormone replacement therapy and age management medicine decided to respond to the latest criticism based on this single study.
Dr. Rouzier states is that all of the recent claims against testosterone therapy have been against synthetic hormones, which are patented by pharmaceutical companies. Synthetic hormones include Androgel, Androderm, and Axiron. Dr. Rouzier also points out that these hormones are not molecularly the same as those of bio-identical hormones in the human body. In addition, there have been no claims against bio-identical hormones, which are not patented, and are exactly the same as those found in the human body.
Media Hype Unfounded
Dr. Rouzier confirms that there is no medical literature or solid evidence to link any sort of testosterone treatment with causing of heart attacks or any other cardiovascular condition. In addition, there has been no surge of patients that are reporting these symptoms or have discontinued their usage based on the findings of this solitary study. He States, “Patients seem to understand that the recent media hype is just that, hype.”
Dr. Rouzier also reports that his own practice has only been contacted by a few patients with questions and no patients have discontinued their usage of testosterone therapy.
The PLOS study is an isolated observational study that does not have the findings to base any such legitimate claim to match all the rest of half a century worth of medical literature and research.
In reality anyone who has suffered a heart attack or myocardial infarction has either age, pre-existing cardiovascular complications, or one of many other numerous health factors to link to as the cause of their condition.
Benefits of Testosterone Therapy
Over the past fifty years there has been study after study which proves that testosterone therapy is a beneficial and safe practice that prevents such occurrences, it does not cause them. There is an overwhelming amount of research available that shows the benefits of such treatment with countless conditions including energy, sex drive, muscle mass, injuries, pain, sleep, and improvement in overall health to name a few.
There is absolutely no risk whatsoever in giving testosterone to a healthy male who is in need of it. As research has proven, it is quite the opposite. Testosterone can prevent the plaque from ever building up in the first place. If you’re not feeling the way you used to, it is time to do something about it and talk with a physician about seeking testosterone and other hormone therapy today!
Note: Vitali-T Medical Clinics uses only natural bio-identical testosterone therapy for their patients.
Dr. Rouzier Debunks Recent “Testosterone Causes Heart Attack” Claims
Dr. Neil Rouzier wrote a recent article debunking the current news surrounding ‘Testosterone Therapy Causes An Increased Risk Of Heart Attacks In Men’.
“Many of my patients stopped taking testosterone because of the JAMA article, even those who had experienced substantial benefits. And now we find out it was all based on nothing but sloppy science. We are talking about real consequences on individuals’ health and quality of life,” states Abraham Morgentaler, MD, of Harvard University who is chairman of the Androgen Study Group.
Mis-Information of the JAMA Article
Dr. Rouzier states that the article has already undergone two published corrections. The first was in January due to misreporting of primary results. The second correction went through in March to unveil “major errors” in the article’s content.
Their raw table numbers proved protection against myocardial infarction / heart attacks, and not a risk at all. In addition, the numbers published in their tables were different from the numbers used in their statistical analysis.
Experts Petition For JAMA To Retract Their Recent Article
Three professional medical societies and a group of 130 scientists and physicians have petitioned for JAMA to take down their recent article (JAMA 2013; 310:1829-36).
“To have several professional societies and so many of the most accomplished experts in the field unite in this action indicates the seriousness of the article’s errors, and the magnitude of damage this article has caused to the public’s perception of testosterone therapy,” Said Dr. Morgentaler.
Conclusion
Dr. Rouzier ends the article stating that; The truth of the matter is, according to 40 years of studies, that not only is there no increased risk in men on testosterone replacement therapy, but that there is significant benefit. These studies demonstrate that low endogenous levels of testosterone are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and heart attacks.
Testosterone has been shown to prevent plaque deposition (atherosclerosis), which is the primary cause of heart attacks. Our goal should be to prevent the plaque from forming in the first place thereby preventing any heart attack from ever occurring.
Neal Rouzier, MD Article Below:
Is Testosterone Therapy in Men Harmful?
Does It Cause an Increased Risk of Heart Attacks?
A critical review of recent television advertising
By Neal Rouzier, MD
You might have been alarmed by the recent television commercials from law firms soliciting patients that have taken testosterone and suffered a heart attack. Unfortunately, these campaigns have been influenced by a recent negative observational study of weak power and poor design and that has also been severely criticized by many medical experts in urology and endocrinology. In spite of the worrisome television hype, patients and doctors should not be led astray or fear using testosterone solely based on the hysteria created by attorneys.
In contrast to this recent negative study, there are over 40 years of well-designed, randomized controlled trials and observational studies that all support the safety and efficacy of testosterone administration. The most recent negative study of concern, which reported an association between the use of testosterone therapy and increased risk of death and heart attacks, appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). This has led legal zealots to believe they can sue for anyone that might have suffered a heart attack while taking testosterone (which, by the way, had nothing to do with taking testosterone). However this has resulted in many patients becoming concerned about the use of testosterone and this has led many patients to question if they should discontinue their testosterone medication due to the fear of what they have heard or read on television.
In spite of this fear that has been instilled in the public by certain attorney groups, the public does not have enough experience or information to make informed decisions concerning the use of testosterone. I wish to explain and elaborate on why this study should be ignored and that no one should stop taking testosterone or fear taking it. Physicians should not cease prescribing testosterone and patients should not stop using testosterone based on this one weak study, the results of which goes against a plethora of data showing safety and efficacy. I base my therapy on a composite of many studies over several decades of research and not on one rogue study that, in the opinion of medical experts, should be discarded.
It helps to understand the difference between a randomized controlled study (RCTs) and an observational study. In an RCT, subjects are screened to remove those that have other medical problems or issues that might adversely influence the data and results. And this observational study is not as powerful, accurate, or reliable as an RCT. To simplify understanding RCTs, there is a treated group and a placebo group that are specifically tested by eliminating any patients that may have risk factors that would skew any results. In observational studies this careful selection does not take place and reports (which may or may not be RCTs) are selectively reviewed without any regard to avoiding biases and errors. Reviewers pick and choose from the studies without randomization or control from other influencing factors which can add inaccuracy and bias to any study. There was significant inaccuracy and error in this recent JAMA study.
A post by three professional medical societies, along with an international group of 130 scientists and physicians, has petitioned JAMA to retract this recent article (JAMA 2013; 310:1829-36). In a letter addressed to JAMA editors, the newly formed Androgen Study Group cites “gross data mismanagement thereby rendering the article no longer credible.” The article was one of two studies that prompted the FDA to issue a safety bulletin on the use of testosterone products. However, this warning from the FDA is only an advisory as the FDA has cautioned both patients and physicians not to stop testosterone therapy based on just one study and this study had significant design flaws which incorrectly led to negative results.
This article has already undergone two published corrections. The first was published in January due to misreporting of primary results. A second correction published in March revealed what the group called “major errors” in the article’s text and figures. Translation: the statistical analysis utilized was not appropriate and other statistical methods actually show opposite (beneficial) results.
Also, the numbers used for the statistical analysis were different from the numbers published in their tables. The raw numbers in their tables actually proved protection against myocardial infarction (heart attack) and not an increase in risk! It is not until their data is plugged into a complex analytical scheme that it shows harm and thus the insistence that the study be recalled by JAMA. The letter was signed by the International Society for Sexual Medicine, the Sexual Medicine Society of North America, and the International Society for the Study of the Aging Male, along with more than 125 scientists and physicians (of which I am one).
“This is an extraordinary event,” said Abraham Morgentaler, MD, of Harvard University who is chairman of the Androgen Study Group. “In my 25 years in academic medicine, I have never witnessed anything like this response to a journal article.” He adds that the call for retraction of an article is exceedingly rare. “To have several professional societies and so many of the most accomplished experts in the field unite in this action indicates the seriousness of the article’s errors, and the magnitude of damage this article has caused to the public’s perception of testosterone therapy.”
He goes on to say that, “Lost in the media frenzy that followed this article’s publication is the fact that substantial evidence accumulated over 30 years has repeatedly shown that higher testosterone levels are associated with better cardiovascular outcomes. In the interests of medical science and the public good, JAMA should do the right thing and retract the article.”
“Many of my patients stopped taking testosterone because of the JAMA article, even those who had experienced substantial benefits. And now we find out it was all based on nothing but sloppy science. We are talking about real consequences on individuals’ health and quality of life,” states Dr. Morgentaler. The Androgen Study Group says it is dedicated to the education and accurate reporting on the science of testosterone deficiency and treatment in men. It was organized specifically to respond to the “recent unwarranted, unscientific attacks” on testosterone therapy in the medical and public media.
I too cannot emphasize enough the importance of realizing that one negative study does not negate 40 years of past positive and beneficial studies proving protection against heart attacks. RCTs have more power and predictive value and this study was not an RCT but was simply an observational study with many design flaws and errors in analysis.
A recent statement from the American Academy of Clinical Endocrinologists supports these facts suggesting that physicians and patients should not jump to conclusions and stop their testosterone prescription based on one poorly done study. Patients should continue taking testosterone until further evaluation and review is complete. The FDA, knowing the history of 40 years of positive studies demonstrating protection against heart disease, has also recommended that men not stop their testosterone prescriptions based on a study of poor methodology.
The truth of the matter is, according to 40 years of studies, that not only is there no increased risk in men on testosterone replacement therapy, but that there is significant benefit. These studies demonstrate that low endogenous levels of testosterone are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and heart attacks. Testosterone has been shown to prevent plaque deposition (atherosclerosis) which is the primary cause of heart attacks. Our goal should be to prevent the plaque from forming in the first place thereby preventing any heart attack from ever occurring.
Despite the negative press seen on television, various medical academies and experts recommend testosterone for cardiovascular protection as well as for quality of life benefits as demonstrated in 40 years of solid research. Men should not stop taking testosterone. For those men not taking testosterone, you should!
Respectfully submitted, Neal Rouzier, M.D.