<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: bone fractures</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'bone fractures'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22bone+fractures%22&t=%22bone+fractures%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:51:29 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Understanding Research Methodology 5: Applied and Basic Research</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820922&amp;cid=t_159188_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F05%2F12%2Funderstanding-research-methodology-5-applied-and-basic-research%2F</link>
            <description>In conclusion, I will leave you with the words of Keith Stanovich:
[I]t is probably a mistake to view the basic-versus-applied distinction solely in terms of whether a study has practical applications, because this difference often simply boils down to a matter of time.  Applied findings are of use immediately.  However, there is nothing so practical as a general and accurate theory. (2007, p.107)
References
Stanovich, K. (2007).  How to Think Straight About Psychology: 8th Edition.  Boston, MA: Allyn &amp; Bacon.
Photo by Helen Cook, available under a Creative Commons attribution license. (Source: World of Psychology)</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820922</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 19:55:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820922</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Boning Up On How Merck Marketed Fosamax</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3115282&amp;cid=t_159188_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fpd0hZv77gYo%2F</link>
            <description>Did you know that ostopenia is considered by many physicians to be normal thinning of bones as aging occurs? And that in 1992 a group of osteoporisis experts met in Rome and decided arbitrarily who should be treated for ostopenia? Essentially, they created a new category and never imagined the term would become a marketing cry for Merck to sell Fosamax. But NPR reports that&amp;#8217;s what happened. 
Along the way, Merck wanted to increase the market for its drug, but that required scanning, an expensive and inconvenient procedure. So Merck created a nonprofit called the Bone Measurement Institute to push for alternative scanning solutions, such as smaller, cheaper machines. The drugmaker allegedly bullied makers of bigger scanners and offered financing to docs to encourage purchases of the n...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3115282</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:39:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3115282</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Amgen’s Bone Loss Drug and Prostate Cancer</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1623065&amp;cid=t_159188_136_f&amp;fid=36051&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FCancerCommentary%2F%7E3%2F335918405%2F</link>
            <description>In this study of more than 1,400 men, denosumab treatment produced statistically significantly greater increases in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (primary endpoint) and non-vertebral sites compared with placebo at multiple time points. These improvements in BMD were consistent with those seen in other denosumab studies evaluating BMD in women with breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitor therapy, and in post-menopausal women with low bone mass.
During the 36-month evaluation period, men receiving denosumab experienced less than half the incidence of new vertebral fractures (a secondary endpoint) compared with those receiving placebo, a statistically significant finding. Furthermore, in the denosumab arm there were fewer non-vertebral fractures over the 36-month period.
...</description>
            <author>Cancer Commentary</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1623065</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:26:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1623065</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Avandia Causes Osteoporosis and Broken Bones--But Actos Does TOO!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1067812&amp;cid=t_159188_134_f&amp;fid=35137&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fdiabetesupdate.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F12%2Favandia-causes-osteoporosis-but-actos.html</link>
            <description>This week's medical news is full of reports about a study that explains why Avandia causes osteoporosis. Here's a report that gives more than the usual amount of detail about this study:Avandia Researchers Find Reason Behind Bone Fracture, Osteoporosis Side Effectshttp://www.newsinferno.com/archives/2123I have already blogged about Avandia's connection with a doubling of the incidence of fractures this last year HERE.But what concerns me now is that the way this new story is being reported makes it sound as if the osteoporosis is only a side effect of Avandia, a drug that for all practical purposes is dead after the press discovered the long-known fact that research proved it increases heart attacks. But as the article I link above makes clear, the reason Avandia causes the bones to thin i...</description>
            <author>Diabetes Update</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1067812</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:09:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1067812</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Another Bone Breaking Blow For The Diabetic Drug Avandia</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1067877&amp;cid=t_159188_134_f&amp;fid=36049&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FDiabetesNotes%2F%7E3%2F194458045%2F</link>
            <description>Another blow for Avandia. Not only has the diabetic drug been linked to increased risk of heart disease but now bone fractures. Prolonged use of rosiglitazone, Avandia, can lead to severe osteoporosis.
Bones are thought of as being &amp;#8217;solid&amp;#8217; in structure but in actuality they are constantly breaking down and building back up. According to this week&amp;#8217;s issue of Nature Medicine, the Avandia increasing the activity of the cells that are responsible for the degrading of bone.
Up to this point increased fractures among diabetics was thought to be from the the lack of building among bone cells and not the actual increased breaking down of these same cells. I am sure there will be more to come in the near future&amp;#8230;
hat tip Steve at Daggerpress.com 
Share This (Source: Diabetes ...</description>
            <author>Diabetes Notes</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1067877</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:04:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1067877</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

