Skip Navigation


European Heart Journal Advance Access originally published online on August 18, 2005
European Heart Journal 2005 26(18):1822-1823; doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehi469
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
26/18/1822    most recent
ehi469v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Messerli, F. H.
Right arrow Articles by Sichrovsky, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Messerli, F. H.
Right arrow Articles by Sichrovsky, T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The European Society of Cardiology 2005. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org

When premature is not premature—the ASCOT study

Franz H. Messerli* and Tina Sichrovsky

Department of Cardiology, St Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, Columbia University, 1000, Tenth Avenue, Suite 3B-30, New York 10019, NY, USA

Received 28 April 2005; revised 4 August 2005; accepted 4 August 2005; online publish-ahead-of-print 18 August 2005.

* Corresponding author. Tel: +1 212 523 7373; fax: +1 212 523 7765. E-mail address: fmesserli@aol.com

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

‘Controversy is the Lifeblood of Science’

Sir George Pickering1

Almost 3 years ago, in the aftermath of the ALLHAT study,2 the New York Times was carrying the headlines ‘Older way to treat hypertension found best’.3 ALLHAT, the largest study ever done, showed no difference in primary outcome (coronary heart disease) among the three treatment arms but seemed to favour chlorthalidone over amlodipine or lisinopril with regard to some secondary endpoints. Clearly, these headlines will need to be amended in view of the . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?