This release reports on the results of a small study comparing two drugs used to treat narcolepsy and other sleep disorders with a placebo in gauging whether the drugs heighten impulse control, and suggests these results could be applied to the general population. The release claims that after a single dose, one of the drugs, Modafinil, reduced impulsive behavior in the study’s 60 normal weight males who volunteered for the trial. The release, however, neglects to quantify the drug’s success in curbing impulsive eating. And it unjustifiably claims the drug would “have an even bigger effect on food addicts,” even though the study did not include people with excess weight or obesity. Nor does it mention any possible harms or the study’s funding sources.
Obesity rates in the U.S. have steadily climbed during recent decades, and more than one-third (36.5%) of adults over age 20 have obesity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Those searching for a magic bullet to curb obesity would welcome the introduction of a single pill if it were substantially effective, but that moment has not yet arrived.
There was no mention of the cost of Modafinil. According to GoodRx, a supply of 30 tablets containing 200 mg ranged from $86 at Safeway to $141 at Target on the day of our web search.
The release is filled with general statements about the benefits of Modafinil in reducing impulse eating but provides no numerical data to back up the claims. It uses statements such as “We found Modafinil . . . did reduce people’s impulsive behavior,” and “Modafinil was found to have an effect on impulsivity in healthy individuals.”
The study was based on just a single dose given to healthy volunteers who were followed up with psychological testing. The release does not provide any explanation of what the test measured or revealed, only that Modafinal “significantly reduced level of impulsiveness.”
Nowhere in the release is there any mention of possible harms from taking Modafinil, although a brief web search suggest there are numerous potential side effects associated with the drug including anxiety, backache, sleeping problems and potential heart complications.
While this was a controlled study comparing two experimental groups, one each taking a separate drug, and a third receiving a placebo, it used a very small number of participants — only 20 per group. Moreover, the release emphasizes the possible usefulness of one of the drugs — Modafinil — as curbing the impulsivity of its users and makes the leap to suggesting the drug is effective in helping obese patients curb their eating. But a more effective indicator would have been to use actual obese patients in the study rather than young healthy individuals if the key argument, as indicated in the news release, was to find ways to help obese people.
Based on a single dose and a positive result on one of several psychological tests, the study yielded no evidence relating to compulsive eating or impulse control in the real world.
There’s a lot of missing context here about the study that raise some basic questions. What was the length of the trial? What dosages were volunteers given? How was reduced impulsivity measured?
We rated this category “not satisfactory” since the headline and text of the release refers to “food addicts.” There is no medical diagnosis known as food addiction.
The release makes no mention of who funded this study, nor does it mention any potential or possible conflicts of interest on the part of the researchers.
There is no mention of alternatives to the use of the narcolepsy drugs studied as a means of weight control. The release could have acknowledged there are numerous appetite-control drugs, countless diets and exercise strategies available for to help change eating patterns.
The release makes clear that modafinil is already on the market and widely available around the world.
The release suggests that the researchers’ “initial tests” back up the theory that Modafinil can aid impulsive eaters as it has shown to be effective in reducing impulsiveness in alcohol dependence, schizophrenia and ADHD. But the present study doesn’t do that. Nor is it novel. There have been previous studies observing Modafinil’s effect on food intake. For example, here.
We’ll give the release the benefit of the doubt here since we’ve already addressed some language issues elsewhere in the review. However, the general premise of the release — that a single dose of a drug might curb obesity — is stretching credulity.
Systematic, Criteria-Driven
I miss @HealthNewsRevu popping up in my feed. Loved seeing this one today.
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2021/06/zombie-health-care-news/
#healthcare #journalism #ethics #conflictofinterest
Puleeeeease... this 'game changer' weight loss drug causes more nausea and vomiting than a placebo. Some game, some change. My friend Gary would spank you for using the eighth word medical reporters should never, ever use. @garyschwitzer @thackerpd
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/just-journalists-writing-tips-case-studies/7-words-and-more-you-shouldnt-use-in-medical-news/ https://twitter.com/OttawaCitizen/status/1361426796126830597
A scary @statnews Op-Ed warns that govt attempts to rein in Pharma may cut off access to "life-changing" drugs.
It takes @garyschwitzer to let us know: the author spent 10 years as Pfizer's public-policy chief. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1360325022578053123
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like