 |
 |
The second study claiming it found an association between DAs and gambling was published in 2005 - Dr. Leann Dodd was the lead author. Among those taking DAs, Dr. Dodd found an incidence of.... well, it is hard to say, actually, since all she said was that she found 11 people who became pathological gamblers after starting a DA. Since it seemed odd for a study from which no incidence could be derived should be publicized via Reuters, I wrote to Dr. Dodd with a list of questions. I asked about the absence of incidence; the fact that about 73% of the DA gamblers were also on sinemet; why she included four people in her 11 who had not started gambling until 1 - 2.5 years after starting/increasing the dosage of a DA; and why, in her survey of the literature in the field on the subject, she excluded without explanation a study by Molina, who found an incidence of pathological gambling of 4.0-4.5% among subjects on levodopa alone - there is no mention of other drugs. Dr. Dodd responded, commenting that my questions were very good and not at all like the questions she had typically been receiving from PWP/caregivers. She asked what my background and motivation were and suggested that we engage publicly by via a letter to the editor (LTTE) at the Archives of Neurology (AN). I told her I have PD and said I would be happy to engage via AN, how would I go about doing that. Dr. Dodd never responded. As it turns out, the deadline had long since passed by the time Dr. Dodd made her suggestion, a fact that could not have been lost on her given that she had already responded to other LTTEs regarding her study (see the February issue of AN). Last night I emailed Dr. Dodd again, asking how a study without incidence could be meaningful, and why Molina, even if he had, as she claimed in response to a LTTE, failed to mention the presence of other dopaminergic drugs, was not permitted to absolve those drugs of complicity out of hand - because after all, that was what she did with sinemet, pretty much. Finally, I pointed out that given that the majority of gamblers in her study were also on sinemet, the onset/cessation of behavior coinciding with the starting/stopping a DA could not be taken as evidence that the DA was solely responsible. Unless one also observed some [significant, preferably] elevation in incidence among a group on DAs *alone,* then clearly it would be possible that an alleged problem could be the result of the two drugs together, i.e., an excess of dopaminergic activity in general. I will let you know if she responds. Meanwhile, stay tuned for Part III, the Szarfman study. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn