Note to our followers: Due to a lack of sufficient funding, HealthNewsReview.org will cease daily publication of new content at the end of 2018. Publisher Gary Schwitzer and other contributors may post new articles periodically. If you wish to donate, your gift might help keep the site available to the public for a few more years, by defraying costs of web hosting and maintenance. All of our 6,000+ published articles contain lessons to help people improve their critical thinking about health care. Read more about our change in status. And here's how to make a donation.
Read Original Story

All anecdote, no data: NPR’s take on high blood pressure and dementia

Rating

3 Star

Categories

Worried About Dementia? You Might Want to Check Your Blood Pressure

Our Review Summary

This NPR report built around exhortations to control blood pressure by the head of a federal health agency draws attention to the long-documented links between hypertension and some forms of dementia.

For many, many reasons, diagnosing and treating high blood pressure are good ideas for maintaining health and preventing strokes and heart disease, and the better news is that there are dozens of drugs and lifestyle changes available — some of them very inexpensive — to help people do so.

But this story doesn’t explain that the evidence for an association between high blood pressure and vascular dementia, much less Alzheimer’s disease, is so far mostly observational. And perhaps more significantly, the story carries no data at all to support even the claims or strengths/weaknesses of the association.

 

Why This Matters

This NPR story missed an opportunity to offer the data and help the public understand more about risk assessment and probabilities of disease related to blood pressure. And it may mislead people into thinking that if they pop a pressure pill each day, they will avoid Alzheimer’s Disease. That’s unproven.

Criteria

Does the story adequately discuss the costs of the intervention?

Not Applicable

No specific brand name interventions mentioned, though it’s implied that medication is frequently used.

While we wouldn’t expect the story to list the prices of the many drugs for high blood pressure, we do think the story could have discussed this aspect of seeking treatment. Is it a factor in why so many people don’t treat their high blood pressure?

Does the story adequately quantify the benefits of the treatment/test/product/procedure?

Not Satisfactory

The story makes several references to “greatly magnified” and an “increase” in risk of AD or vascular dementia among those with high blood pressure that goes untreated, but there are no solid data offered to support the claim, nor how treating blood pressure reduces that risk (and to what extent).

Does the story adequately explain/quantify the harms of the intervention?

Not Applicable

As with costs, we wouldn’t expect a story like this to cover all the side effects of the myriad treatments.

But we do think it could have noted that one reason blood pressure drugs are prescription-only is because they can cause side effects that may need medical management. Unlike what the story said, it is not as simple and carefree as taking “a pill… to help keep [your] brain healthy and sharp.”

Does the story seem to grasp the quality of the evidence?

Not Satisfactory

The story, as noted earlier, is based on comments from the director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. The story does not say anything about the nature or quality of the evidence on which the advice is based, or make clear that the last word is far from written about the causes of Alzheimer’s Disease and other dementias.

Does the story commit disease-mongering?

Not Satisfactory

The story strongly suggets that people should take blood pressure medication to lower their risk of dementia. The evidence in the story wasn’t strong enough to cross that line.

At the very least, the story should have provided links to the studies in this sentence: “At least two large studies have revealed an alarming trend among stroke patients.”

It’s also worth noting that the threshold for treatment is under debate, with some saying that blood pressure should be even lower than 130/80. New suggestions like this — that BP control can lower dementia risk — may amplify such concerns by driving even more people in for treatment without a full grasp of the tradeoffs between potential benefits and potential harms.

Does the story use independent sources and identify conflicts of interest?

Not Satisfactory

The story quotes an official of the Alzheimer’s Association, which has an obvious interest in the prevention and treatment of AD. But NPR would have added much credibility to the story with some cautionary note from outside sources about the nature of the evidence for blood pressure control and AD prevention.

Does the story compare the new approach with existing alternatives?

Satisfactory

The story indirectly discusses alternatives–such as exercise and diet.

Does the story establish the availability of the treatment/test/product/procedure?

Satisfactory

It’s clear in the story that blood pressure medications and lifestyle changes are readily available.

Does the story establish the true novelty of the approach?

Satisfactory

The story makes it clear that the news “hook” is new research to be presented at the Alzheimer’s Association meeting. (Why not wait for that, to make this story meatier?)

Does the story appear to rely solely or largely on a news release?

Satisfactory

The Alzheimer’s Association website is promoting its upcoming July annual meeting, but there was no news release specifically addressing the content of this story.

Total Score: 4 of 8 Satisfactory

Comments

We Welcome Comments. But please note: We will delete comments left by anyone who doesn’t leave an actual first and last name and an actual email address.

We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified facts, product pitches, or profanity. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. Comments should primarily discuss the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages about health and medicine. This is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science. Nor is it a forum to share your personal story about a disease or treatment -- your comment must relate to media messages about health care. If your comment doesn't adhere to these policies, we won't post it. Questions? Please see more on our comments policy.