Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This was my first thought.

It's a complicated topic, biochemically / physiologically, however. Guidelines and recommendations have changed many times in the past couple of decades. With the scale of epidemiological data collection and specific studies carried out in recent years, conclusions are still rather "mixed".

There are many reasons to think, mechanistically, that aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) should come out "net positive" in its effects on human health. But, even some of the "prostaglandins", for example, can be important in endothelial function and health (in a positive way).

I will note that I haven't kept up with this topic much in at least 5 or so years, but, I can point to a couple of sources with some analysis / discussion that should be of use to most, I think:

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/aspirin-making-sense-cha...

https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme...

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2791399

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-0...

I specifically remember concerns roughly 10+ years ago that some of the expected net benefits might, in fact, actually be net harms in the broader population - particularly for other NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), but, even, at some point not long thereafter, for "aspirin" as well. I may dig out that info if I get a chance to try to refresh, myself, and will comment again if / when I do.

I always think of Lewis Black's bit on this, though (while pointing out that this is the nature of science and its best to go with the best info available at any time, generally, IMO):

https://youtu.be/iRsTtzYhTxk?t=5m27s




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: