text_1: Drug could fight effects of aging
text_2: This story notes that using growth hormone to counteract the effects of aging is controversial and that it is not FDA approved for this use, yet the story mentions growth hormone is available in “anti-aging” clinics. The term ‘anti-aging’ is a misnomer, as there are no proven medical interventions to stop or reverse the process of aging. Federal law states that distributing or administering human growth hormone for age-related health problems or for cosmetic use is illegal. Growth hormone is currently only approved for adults with Growth Hormone Deficiency (GHD) and for children with pituitary disorders. The promotion of growth hormone to counteract the effects of aging, namely a decline in physical functioning, is not new; however, the benefit of this use has not been established and the long-term safety is unknown. In this randomized controlled study, an increase in physical functioning was reported in the growth hormone group, but we are not told the degree of this benefit, or if the difference in functioning (measured by improved balance, climbing stairs and heel-to-toe walking) between this group and the placebo group was statistically significant. This story notes that diet and exercise are preferred methods of prevention for staying healthy and functional as we age. However, the story focuses on the notion that normal physical decline involved with aging needs to be counteracted with a pill, such as growth hormone. The natural decline in growth hormones with age may actually be protective. The comparison of prescription eye-glasses for older adults with taking growth hormone to improve physical functioning is unfounded and qualifies as disease mongering. Eyeglasses are an intervention to improve a manifestation of aging, i.e. degenerating eyesight, and glasses pose few (if any) risks to physical health. Growth hormone may pose serious risks to the endocrine and cardiovascular systems, and long-term use may actually reduce longevity by increasing the risk of prostate cancer in older men. The only sources of information appear to be researchers who presented their work at a scientific meeting. (There can be problems with such reporting. See “Media reporting on research presented at scientific meetings: more caution needed,” at: http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/184_11_050606/wol10024_fm.html) The story does note that the study was sponsored by Pfizer, maker of the growth hormone drug capromorelin, but there is no independent reporting or corroboration with sources not affiliated with the study.